Proposal: Acquired qualifier for Date element
|Definition:||Date on which the resource was received into the organisation.|
|Type of Term:||Element refinement|
|Why Needed:||In a resource discovery process (Search & Retrieval) for resources in a specific agency, users (e.g. journalist) can have a need for knowing exactly when the agency was aware of the content of a specific resource. The status of a resource can change when it is submitted by one authority to another (e.g. in legislative procedures) without necessarily any change being made to the content of that resource.|
|Related DCMI Terms:||DCMI Term: accepted
Approval Decision: http://dublincore.org/usage/decisions/2002/2002-02.accepted.shtml
Definition: "Date of acceptance of the resource (e.g. of thesis by university department, of article by journal, etc.)."
|Related non-DCMI Terms:||DC.Date.Accepted (Dissertation Online Project)|
|Impact on Applications:||Some or minor impact. But benefits are enhanced interoperability|
|About the Proposers:||
DC-Government Working Group: http://www.dublincore.org/groups/government/
While it might appear that there is overlap between the proposed 'dateAccepted' and the DCMI refinement 'dateAcquired', the two terms serve different purposes. Date.Acquired is about the resource itself being received, 'dateAccepted' is about the content of the resource being approved. One resource may have different values for dateAcquired and dateAccepted, so two refinements are needed. for example a resource arrives in an organisation on a given date, but cannot be formally accepted until it has been reviewed by a committee. Its status changes when it is accepted. At no point does the content of the resource change during this process.
[The summary of the discussion during the Public Comment Period is to be supplied by the Usage Board shepherd before discussion and decision by the Usage Board.]
21 march 2002
Acquisition Date. Should this work like a DCMI Period , initially with just a start date and then an end date for when the organisation gets reorganised and renamed and the resource gets passed on? Perhaps AquiredDate and AquiredBy might make sense as refinements of Publisher? I don't know if this was ever considered? But with the confusing speed at with UK government departments get renamed and reorganised more flexibilty might make sense for the Date Acquired?
21 feb 2002
Date.acquired - shouldn't the encoding scheme be "W3CDTF" instead of "ISO 8601" to match the Date encoding scheme in DC Qualifiers?
28 sept 2001
Date/Acquired - We are unsure as to whether this is in fact discovery mertadata or management metadata.