InCommon metadata support

["Cantor, Scott" <>]

On 1/12/17, 8:00 PM, 
"
 on behalf of Tom Poage" 
<
 on behalf of 
>
 wrote:

> I'm trying to figure out if this reassertion of the MDQ XML provides any 
> benefit vs. simply pointing the vendor(s)
> at mdq-beta (and keeping an eye on developments here) vs. the same old ways 
> of transferring the XML through some
> other semi-trusted means (box.com/O365/Google folder, type it out on a slip 
> of paper ;-) ...).

I think it depends on what the vendor is really capable of doing with it. If 
the consumer is really going to change its behavior based on the metadata 
changing in the correct ways, I suppose there's value. I don't usually trust 
that that's the case unless I know what the implementation is, and if I know 
or suspect it's not correct, I prefer to do one-time exchange and know that 
it's a manual case than rely on automation that won't actually work.

Assuming you did have that confidence, I think I'd insulate myself from the 
mdq-beta endpoint myself.

-- Scott