Hi, Splitting Jerven's points into separate bite sized chunks. On 3 Jun 2013, at 17:51, Michel Dumontier <michel.dumontier@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Jerven, > > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 6:30 PM, Jerven Bolleman <me@jerven.eu> wrote: > Hi All, > > I wanted to discuss one more thing that has been decided in an earlier meeting. > And that is the choice for dcterms:created or pav:createdOn. > As a large data provider I want to only share the date that I published the data on. > i.e. dcterms:issued. Could we change the must to include issued next to created or createdOn. > > This is also a crucial date for the general public while created is not. (e.g. for patent court cases date of publication is critical, the day the file was internally ready is not) > > > under the availability section, we have yet to discuss "issued". From a provenance perspective, "created" is primary metadata, and may coincide with issued for some cases. > I am in agreement with Jerven here: the date a data set is issued is far more important than when it was created. I suggest that we move the issued property together with the publisher up to the core part with the status of MUST and move the created/creator/contributor/author properties to the provenance section with the status of SHOULD. Alasdair Dr Alasdair J G Gray Research Associate Alasdair.Gray@manchester.ac.uk +44 161 275 0145 http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~graya/ Please consider the environment before printing this email.
Received on Tuesday, 4 June 2013 09:10:47 UTC