<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?><!-- generator="b2evolution/2.4.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
	<channel>
		<title>shimenawa - Latest comments on Everyone a user account</title>
		<link>http://blogs.lib.berkeley.edu/shimenawa.php?disp=comments</link>
		<description></description>
		<language>en-US</language>
		<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>
		<admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://b2evolution.net/?v=2.4.2"/>
		<ttl>60</ttl>
				<item>
			<title>In response to: Everyone a user account</title>
			<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 17:19:43 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Daniel Clancy [Visitor]</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">c76067@http://blogs.lib.berkeley.edu/</guid>
			<description>I wanted to respond to your question on the authentication mechanism planned for the institutional subscription.  We have responded to this question in a number of forums include the discussion at ALA and at the DLF discussion.  Our plan is to use industry standard authentication mechanisms for the institutional subscription.  Some institutions use Shiboleth and we will support this although most institutions prefer IP authentication.  The phrase you are extracting from the settlement agreement is refering to the very same standard procedure that you mention earlier in the post that is common in the industry.  Universities and libraries have standard requirements for subscriptions that they license for their students and Google will need to accomodate these requirements similar to other products in the market to offer a successful product.</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[I wanted to respond to your question on the authentication mechanism planned for the institutional subscription.  We have responded to this question in a number of forums include the discussion at ALA and at the DLF discussion.  Our plan is to use industry standard authentication mechanisms for the institutional subscription.  Some institutions use Shiboleth and we will support this although most institutions prefer IP authentication.  The phrase you are extracting from the settlement agreement is refering to the very same standard procedure that you mention earlier in the post that is common in the industry.  Universities and libraries have standard requirements for subscriptions that they license for their students and Google will need to accomodate these requirements similar to other products in the market to offer a successful product.]]></content:encoded>
			<link>http://blogs.lib.berkeley.edu/shimenawa.php/2009/04/15/everyone-a-user-account#c76067</link>
		</item>
				<item>
			<title>In response to: Everyone a user account</title>
			<pubDate>Sat, 18 Apr 2009 11:10:57 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Kevin [Visitor]</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">c76055@http://blogs.lib.berkeley.edu/</guid>
			<description>&quot;Do we imagine that Google will encourage the requisite and widespread deployment of Internet2's Shibboleth?  Ur, no, probably not.&quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Why not?  Google already support shib and is a member of InCommon to support some of those campuses who have chosen to use Google Apps for Ed.</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA["Do we imagine that Google will encourage the requisite and widespread deployment of Internet2's Shibboleth?  Ur, no, probably not."<br />
<br />
Why not?  Google already support shib and is a member of InCommon to support some of those campuses who have chosen to use Google Apps for Ed.]]></content:encoded>
			<link>http://blogs.lib.berkeley.edu/shimenawa.php/2009/04/15/everyone-a-user-account#c76055</link>
		</item>
			</channel>
</rss>
