I think that in the library world of integrating resources - the date of
access would be recorded and given as at least starting from the date viewed
- (Marc lingo = 362 tag)
I think the date that the item was accessed - and possibly inferred that
that is when the item was viewed to create the MODS record - is important to
have in a clearly defined area in the record.
The multiple urls and the date access is an interesting problem. The
various urls given in the MODS record are given attributes or indications of
what they are - right? e.g. Archived site http://bla.bla.edu - Or given in
the related item area of the record? I would think that the main identifier
field has the url for the basic resource that is being described.
Maybe I am thinking too narrowly.
>>> [log in to unmask] 08/29/03 10:31AM >>>
I can imagine the "date accessed" being an attribute of the URL, rather
than being treated as an attribute of the citation as a whole. You may
also have a bibliographic date on the item. So if I cite a web page that
has a copyright date of 2002, but I access that page on May 3, 2003,
then the date of the cited document is 2002, but I am authenticating the
URL only as of May 3, 2003. In a sense, this latter date often
substitutes for a date of publication when the document itself gives no
indication of a publication date, but in fact it is information about
the URL in my mind. The publication would actually be "n.d." in library
parlance -- "no date."
On Fri, 2003-08-29 at 06:58, Rebecca S. Guenther wrote:
> Date Valid is for describing a resource that has date-sensitive
> information. Examples are a train schedule which is only valid beginning
> on a certain date or a law that will go into effect on a given date.
> On the second question, I was going to answer the same way that Suzanne
> did. The record describes a given resource with an identifier. The
> resource was accessed on a particular date and is being described in
> of how it appeared on that date. So is there really a need to link them?
> The only situation I can think of when you might want to associate the
> date with an identifier is if you are giving more than one URI and you
> accessed them on different dates-- maybe a mirror site or something. If
> people think it important to enable linking the dateAccessed with the
> identifier, we could use the ID and IDref constructs available in XML as
> attributes to dateAccessed and Identifier, which would provide a linking
> On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
> > On Thursday, August 28, 2003, at 05:18 PM, Rebecca S. Guenther wrote:
> > > It has been suggested that MODS include a date of access. The
> > > given was for bibliographic citations. The Chicago Manual of Style
> > > includes an access date for an electronic resource (i.e. date it was
> > > last accessed, since Web sites change frequently) in standard
> > > bibliographic citations. This is different from dateModified, which
> > > being added to MODS in version 3.0, in that dateModified tells you
> > > date that the resource was last changed, while date accessed would
> > > tell you when it was last viewed or accessed and makes no claims
> > > when it was last modified.
> > What is the purpose of dateValid then?
> > > Are there any thoughts about adding another date to MODS? Under
> > > originInfo it would be dateAccessed. It then would use the dateType
> > > definitions.
> > Question: how would one then couple the access date with a specific
> > URL, since each would be contained in different elements?
> > Bruce