Skip to Content.

edugain-discuss - Re: [eduGAIN-discuss] [refeds] mari plan & next steps

edugain-discuss AT lists.geant.org

Subject: An open discussion list for topics related to the eduGAIN interfederation service.

List archive


Re: [eduGAIN-discuss] [refeds] mari plan & next steps


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Leif Johansson <leifj AT sunet.se>
  • To: REFEDS <refeds AT terena.org>, "edugain-discuss AT geant.net" <edugain-discuss AT geant.net>
  • Subject: Re: [eduGAIN-discuss] [refeds] mari plan & next steps
  • Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 18:25:56 +0100
  • List-archive: <https://mail.geant.net/mailman/private/edugain-discuss/>
  • List-id: eduGAIN discussion list <edugain-discuss.geant.net>

On 2014-10-29 17:39, Peter Schober wrote:
> * Leif Johansson <leifj AT sunet.se> [2014-10-29 17:34]:
>> If R&S specifies releasing eduPersonScopedAffiliation and FEIDE doesn't
>> have that attribute, how will including it in a bundle help FEIDE?
>
> That's probably my point: It won't help FEIDE per se, it would force
> FEIDE to align its practices with the spec IFF they wanted to be able
> to apply to (SPs) or support (IDPs) REFEDS R&S.
>
> I.e., I wouldn't want to weaken the harmonization brought about by
> having standardized attribute bundles by making them refer to
> meta-attributes instead.

These are two different problems:

1. get X to release data with the required semantics
2. get X to release data with the required syntax

to my bind 1 is tractable and R&S will help but 2 seems to be much
harder. semantics is much more important than syntax if the syntax-
diff is small enough (which I believe it is in this case).

yes, everything is a matter of degrees

Cheers Leif







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.

Top of Page