On 10.05.19 20:09, Peter Gietz wrote:
I am still impressed by the negative mindset of public libraries I found towards RA21 and for-profit scientific publishers in general, which I noticed at meetings and in individual conversations.
Regarding RA21, this is to some extend based on the fact that some publishers already have tried to enforce in contract negotiations, with reference to RA21, that libraries switch to SAML as the only authentication method and in some cases that they not only provide a persistent/targeted/pairwise ID but also personal data like names and email addresses. That's why many libraries, at least in Germany, wouldn't support any recommendation that promotes SAML as the only authentication method or doesn't include anonymous access via SAML.
In my opinion using SAML as the only authentication method also would be a non-starter from a technical perspective. Many publisher unfortunately have a really bad record regarding SAML support, with things breaking when they make changes and issues often taking weeks or even months or years to resolve, if they are resolved at all.
Best regards, Bernd