[mdx] MDX & expressing communites-of-interest

[Ian Young]

On 20 May 2009, at 14:08, Thomas Lenggenhager wrote:

> What needs to be solved for operational reasons:
> Anyone can assert an affiliation membership for a collection of
> entityIDs, even without these entities are aware of and do agree!

I really don't see this as a problem, as long we understand that  
defining the *meaning* of the grouping is the responsibility of the  
affiliation entity registrant.

> That is like http links resolving to 404 :-)

I think it's more like someone writing a web page that refers to other  
web pages without the permission of the creators of those other  
pages.  Which of course is the normal case on the web.

> Some policy expressed in practice statements will have to be linked to
> the affiliation membership assertion in order to become operationally
> practical.

The *registrant* of a particular affiliation entity would have to  
define what the grouping meant for it to be useful to its ultimate  
consumers, yes.  But that doesn't mean that either the registrar or  
any other party needs to care about that definition, or anything else  
other than that the affiliation entity metadata has been registered  
authentically.

	-- Ian



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2448 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.iay.org.uk/pipermail/mdx-iay.org.uk/attachments/20090520/55620cc9/attachment-0002.bin>