DeniseColbert
commented
1 year ago Vino to explore her tests of 2019 to cost work required to create central table of UserIDs
Denise to investigate previous barriers to single-sign on, and Transcription Agreement status re. FreeBMD
At present (as I understand it) there are separate userid resources for each project. I can see advantages in there being a single point of contact through which users log in to the system. FreeBMD appears to have two tables: one of user identifiers; the second specifying the specific access rights that user has within FreeBMD. If all three projects adopted this model, the initial generic login could be supported by this centralized table.
Up to now, user identifiers have been used primarily to control access for transcribers and coordinators actively working within a project. However, support for saved searches and saved search results means that our general users will start to acquire identifiers. From their perspective it makes no sense to have different identifiers for each of the three FUG projects. The same applies if we want to encourage transcribers to switch across from one project to another - something the FreeComETT data capture system may facilitate.
Having a single sign-in would make it possible for us to offer cross-project capabilities, such as fetching search results from all three projects and allowing users to see them side by side.