Subject Re: [eduGAIN-discuss] mari plan & next steps
From Jaime Pérez Crespo <jaime.perez@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date Wed, 29 Oct 2014 18:21:02 +0100

On 29 Oct 2014, at 17:39 pm, Peter Schober <peter.schober@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> * Leif Johansson <leifj@xxxxxxxx> [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.

And that’s an entirely different problem. First of all I should say that the problem is not that Feide doesn’t have eduPersonScopedAffiliation. We do indeed. Nor it’s that we don’t want to release it. We’re glad to do it. The problem is that most of our institutions don’t have that attribute in their directories, so it’s not that we don’t have it or we don’t want to release it, but: most users don’t have such information.

That given, how exactly would that force Feide to align its practices with the spec? It reminds me of a different discussion I had last week regarding the CoCo. You could say Feide willingly aligns with the spec, but since Feide is not the holder of the attributes… If we are “forced” to align, what does that mean? Should we go to each and every institution out there and threaten them to kick them out of Feide if they don’t include eduPersonScopedAffiliation and schacHomeOrganization for all their users? Should we do that then even for those users/institutions where sHO, for instance, doesn’t have any semantics and cannot actually have any value?

Jaime Pérez
mail: jaime.perez@xxxxxxxxxx
xmpp: jaime@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I, I took the one less traveled by, and that has made all the difference."
- Robert Frost