<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What&#8217;s Your UPD?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://access.jiscinvolve.org/wp/whats-your-upd/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://access.jiscinvolve.org/wp/whats-your-upd/</link>
	<description>federating access management</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 08:35:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Robin Wilton</title>
		<link>http://access.jiscinvolve.org/wp/whats-your-upd/comment-page-1/#comment-73</link>
		<dc:creator>Robin Wilton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2009 08:46:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://access.jiscinvolve.org/whats-your-upd/#comment-73</guid>
		<description>Great post, Nicole. I&#039;ve been arguing for some time that using a spatial metaphor like the word &quot;centric&quot; is an unhelpful way to start. I think there are two key starting factors: assertions of identity are (i) relationship-based and (ii) contextual. If you operate your own UPD and no-one comes, you&#039;re missing (i). If you tell everyone the same things, regardless of context, you&#039;re missing (ii).

So for the user to be the key factor in the system, I think they have to be given the means to exercise consent and control with regard to their personal information. One analogy is a direct debit: you set it up, but you&#039;re not involved every time it gets paid, and you don&#039;t even set the amount. The money stays at the bank until it is paid out. Still, you&#039;re happy with the arrangement because it&#039;s convenient (appropriate level of control) and there are formal mechanisms for getting a refund if it all goes wrong (consent/withdrawal of consent). You&#039;re not really &#039;at the centre&#039; of the transaction in any intuitive way, though, which is why I think the spatial metaphor is unhelpful...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post, Nicole. I&#8217;ve been arguing for some time that using a spatial metaphor like the word &#8220;centric&#8221; is an unhelpful way to start. I think there are two key starting factors: assertions of identity are (i) relationship-based and (ii) contextual. If you operate your own UPD and no-one comes, you&#8217;re missing (i). If you tell everyone the same things, regardless of context, you&#8217;re missing (ii).</p>
<p>So for the user to be the key factor in the system, I think they have to be given the means to exercise consent and control with regard to their personal information. One analogy is a direct debit: you set it up, but you&#8217;re not involved every time it gets paid, and you don&#8217;t even set the amount. The money stays at the bank until it is paid out. Still, you&#8217;re happy with the arrangement because it&#8217;s convenient (appropriate level of control) and there are formal mechanisms for getting a refund if it all goes wrong (consent/withdrawal of consent). You&#8217;re not really &#8216;at the centre&#8217; of the transaction in any intuitive way, though, which is why I think the spatial metaphor is unhelpful&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

