I agree that this information is very helpful and one that has potential for
numerous uses. I also think having it NOT in a note field aids to the
usefulness of the date. I am confused by Bruce's comment about this access
date being separated from the URL - I picture the whole MODS record
connected to the URL so I don't understand the significance of having the
date in a separate field. Or am I missing your intent?
Suzanne C. Pilsk
Smithsonian Institution Libraries
PO Box 37012
Natural History Building, Room 30- MRC 0154
Washington, DC 20013-7012
[log in to unmask]
>>> [log in to unmask] 08/28/03 07:43PM >>>
I think this would be useful for purposes other than traditional
bibliographic citation. For services which are selecting and describing
websites (e.g. subject gateways), there is always the problem of whether
describe a resource which might disappear, and how to describe a resource
which might change significantly from the time it is described. In these
scenarios, having a <dateAccessed> - which could be updated if there is a
significant review of the resource and record - would be a helpful way of
indicating to users 'We accessed and described the resource as we found it
on this date. It may have changed/moved since then'.
> From: Rebecca S. Guenther[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Reply To: Metadata Object Description Schema List
> Sent: Friday, 29 August 2003 7:18 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [MODS] Date accessed
> It has been suggested that MODS include a date of access. The example
> given was for bibliographic citations. The Chicago Manual of Style
> includes an access date for an electronic resource (i.e. date it was
> accessed, since Web sites change frequently) in standard bibliographic
> citations. This is different from dateModified, which is being added to
> MODS in version 3.0, in that dateModified tells you date that the
> was last changed, while date accessed would tell you when it was last
> viewed or accessed and makes no claims about when it was last modified.
> addition to being able to accurately produce bibliographic citations,
> date might be useful for any resource that is updated regularly-- Web
> sites, documents made available electronically, databases.
> AACR2 cataloging generally includes this information in a general note
> Web sites. Since this is a date, a note does not seem an appropriate
> solution (a note can still be input regardless).
> The original suggestion was to add a type attribute to dateOther, but
> is not how we have handled dates in MODS. If a specific type of date, a
> separate element is used. We wouldn't want to mix using a type attribute
> and a separate named element. Are there any thoughts about adding
> date to MODS? Under <originInfo> it would be <dateAccessed>. It then
> use the dateType definitions.