 |
 |
At 7:48 AM +0000 2/6/08, Pete Walker wrote: > >I'd agree with this if a person's privileges do derive from their >membership of their current institutions. I think the concern is >that, through relying on Shib' implementations, some individuals >will have privileges that appear to be institutional when they >should be on an individual basis e.g. external examiners, student >tutors/assessors, people collaborating on papers or research, people >who help on interview panels, etc. > I understood John to say that "people in specific roles at Member institutions would be granted specific privileges". (eg "the Librarian at LSE would automagically be able to do/see X"). I think this is quite separate from the question of how privileges are granted to other people. (e.g. external examiners, student tutors/assessors, people collaborating on papers or research, people who help on interview panels, etc.). There is, of course, the question what LoA you require when these external people access services....