All bar one of our eResources are accessible by HE and FE students
under the same subscription - we store Student or Staff in a network
profile attritbute for all users on our network, and that is sent off to
from the IdP to our providers as eduPersonScopedAffiliate (whether they
are at Hull College, Goole College or Harrogate College - we are a
The one exception is Emerald, which is only accessible to students on
Leeds Met accredited programmes - but they have a non-idp login for this
which their tutor gives them.
Hope that helps.
Dave (IdP Administrator, Hull College Group)
eContent Developer, eLearning Team (L34 - Library)
Wilberforce Drive, Queen's Gardens, Hull
Extension 2230 / Direct Dial: 01482 381930
* * * Think about the environment - Do you really need to print this
email?>>> Nicole Harris <[log in to unmask]> 26/09/2012
JISC Collections have written a briefing paper on this:
Basically, it quite simple. If you register them, they are authorised
users. If you don't they aren't. Unless you register all the
you'd need to negotiate with the publishers for the other resources.
Attributes are pretty irrelevant at that point. 'Register' can be
fairly liberally interpreted as I see it, but that is at the
institution's discretion. What the course wants to do is fairly
irrelevant at this point I'm afraid!
Once you've worked part1 out above, then for the registered student the
easiest thing to do is simply assert member@ for these students if you
can do so without messing up other systems. Many publishers handle
affiliate pretty badly so you will find yourself having to test and
contact to get it to work on a per publisher basis. I know other
have done this so they might want to volunteer a hit list of publishers
that might cause problems. Another option might be just to give them
scope of 'student' but not 'member' if you wish to restrict their
but all this really depends how you are set up and how you are using
member in other scenarios outside of the library resources.
I'd avoid Entitlement as this wouldn't be appropriate unless you do go
down the route of negotiating special access for people that you
don't meet the definition of authorised user.
So 'registered' is your key term to work with to get to authorised
Everyone purposefully avoids defining 'registered' any further to avoid
backing themselves in to a corner.
I hope that helps
On 26/09/2012 11:10, Matthew Slowe wrote:
> * * * Politics Beware * * *
> I've tried writing this email a few times and it's not going to sound
> way up so this is just a brain dump with a request for comment at the
> 1. I'm told that the current government are keen to have FE colleges
> degree courses validated by Universities as it's, apparently,
> 2. I'm also told the way our institution has decided to make this
> work is for a cohort of N students to be taught by the FE College but
> of N be in our HESA stats and (100-X)% be in theirs.
> 3. It transpires that the FE Colleges require the use of our online
> subscriptions (here be MONSTERS!) for reasons which it would be
improper for me
> to go into here.
> This presents me, as the person implementing our Shibboleth IDP, with
> Let N = 1000 and X = 50%.
> So 500 new students will appear on our official numbers and 500 on
> associated FE college. I'm working on the assumption that the first
> constitute "member" but the other 500 don't.
> Assuming the above is correct (and I'm happy to take discussion on
> what could we possibly assert for the others? All I could come up
> "affiliate" as the technical recommendations document says:
> §220.127.116.11 The value affiliate is defined as applying to those
> the organisation has some dealings, but to whom no set of general
> privileges are extended.
> This would seem to apply. However we'd need to get all the relevant
> services to agree to accept (for a fee?) the assertion of affiliate
> The other option that I can see is agreeing, either bilaterally with
> multilaterally via the Federation, to the use of an
> assert access should be allowed (i.e. we've done some checking and
> this user is allowed under any specific terms agreed between the
> the service).
> So many license things seem to be keyed off the HESA return that this
> a good idea in the long run, can it?
> Is there precedent for any of this (the FE college students being
> between HESA numbers, having access to journals etc)?
> Thanks for getting this far and I hope it made sense!
5 Lancaster Place
London WC2E 7EN
This message is sent in confidence for the addressee
only. It may contain confidential or sensitive
information. The contents are not to be disclosed
to anyone other than the addressee. Unauthorised
recipients are requested to preserve this
confidentiality and to advise us of any errors in
transmission. Any views expressed in this message
are solely the views of the individual and do not
represent the views of the College. Nothing in this
message should be construed as creating a contract.
Hull College owns the email infrastructure, including the contents.
Hull College is committed to sustainability, please reflect before printing this email.