Hello Judy

> All Matterhorn users or potential users:
> Given that we will be building on our authorization capabilities in future 
> versions of
> Matterhorn, we're interested in gathering a greater understanding of what 
> needs
> *your* institution may have around authorization. We are particularly 
> interested in
> how granular permissions need to be.
> 
> Currently, the administrator can specify, for any Series, which roles can view
> recordings in that Series published to the Engage server. The next step is 
> likely to
> add the ability to specify which roles can "manage" the recordings in the 
> admin UI.
> For 1.3 is it is likely that we will expanding the Series Permissions UI as 
> was
> originally planned for 1.2:
> <http://opencast.jira.com/wiki/display/MH/Permission+Management+on+Series+UI
> +for+1.2> (the column labeled "Edit" really should be "Manage"...editing the
> mockup isn't working at the moment).

Changed the "Edit" to "Manage". There is "Make changes" also, is that identical 
to "Manage" (cannot edit that mock-up)?

> Of course, "manage" is a pretty all-encompassing term. So, some questions
> concerning Series-level privileges:
> --To meet your needs, will the above work? i.e. Is it okay to allow anybody 
> that has
> management rights on a series to have *all* management rights?
> --Or do you need this to be more fine-grained, e.g. something like
> <http://opencast.jira.com/wiki/display/MH/Extended+Series+Authorization>?  
> (This
> is only a sketch to demonstrate what more fine-grained authorization might
> entail...don't take it too seriously.)

Having a quick look at your mock-ups, I'd say that the extended authorization 
is not necessary for us here at ETH. If I understand your distinction 
correctly...
 
> And, there are some authorization controls we will need beyond those for 
> Series.
> Some are illustrated on a potential new "Roles" UI:
> <http://opencast.jira.com/wiki/display/MH/Roles+page> (again just a sketch as 
> we
> begin to play with ideas...these may not be at a useful or realistic level of
> granularity). We'll also need to limit access to capture agents (no sketches 
> for this
> yet).

... I would speak in favour of having sophisticated "admin" roles instead in 
that 

- we would like students to do the trimming, without being able to do anything 
else or
- would like to restrict any deletion action (scheduled recordings, recordings) 
to the actual admin(s).

> Basically, what we're interested in is whether there are some Matterhorn admin
> activites that you want some of your users to be able to do that you don't 
> want
> others to do.
> 
> If you can respond to this thread with any input on this issue (your reaction 
> to the
> above sketches or questions, requirements that you have, use cases, lists of
> privileges, anything) it would be immensely helpful. Or, even better would be 
> if
> you'd be willing to have a conversation with us about this; let us know if 
> you'd be
> willing to be interviewed!

Sure - makes a change from talking about metadata...

Regards

Olaf A. 


> Please note that this message (and the linked sketches) should not be taken 
> as any
> promise of what Matterhorn authorization will be. We're just exploring needs, 
> not
> even considering technical feasibility at this time.
> 
> thanks in advance for your help,
> Judy Stern (and Adam Hochman)
> 
> 
> Judy Stern
> Educational Technology Services, UC Berkeley [email protected]
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Matterhorn-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn-users

Reply via email to