>
>
> I've been discussing with the UK federation Help Desk the idea of
> using [log in to unmask] (or something similar) as a way of
> identifying those members of the University of Cambridge who are
> entitled to access to the bulk of our library-style electronic
> resources - for various internal reasons it is difficult for us to use
> [log in to unmask] for this at the moment. The federation recommend that
> I don't do this, mainly on the grounds that doing so would be unusual,
> but also because I'd be using scope as a way of generating what
> amounts to new affiliation values. I understand this advice, though
> I'm on the verge of ignoring it.
yeah, I'm afraid we ignore it at the moment as we use
[log in to unmask] and [log in to unmask] to distinguish
between us in the Executive and the JISC Collections staff who currently
share a directory with us (and use JISC e-mail addresses) because of
their historical executiveness! i just couldn't make any of the
alternatives work for us. all of our current Service Providers have
accepted it, and miraculously are able to distinguish and restrict
between the two.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Anything in this message which does not clearly relate to the official
work of the sender's organisation shall be understood as neither given
nor endorsed by that organisation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|