I definitely agree that we need the "date last accessed" as you describe, combining the meanings of 1 and 4. This is required in some citation formats. I have to admit that I never really grokked the "interest" aspect of this so I kind of ignored it. Have we agreed to add dataValid? I don't see it in 2.0. kc At 10:02 AM 9/26/2003 -0400, you wrote: >We've had discussion about adding this date accessed to MODS. I would like >to make a proposal. In response to Ray's message, I meant a combination of >1 and 4. That it was the last time someone viewed or accessed the resource >at a particular location. In other words, you are saying "this is the date >that I accessed this resource at this location and can only say that it >looked this way and it was accessible at this location on that date". I >don't think it's a question of interest, but vouching for its being there >and having that content at that point in time. > >So, given the fact that we now have decided to include URIs that are >locations in the location element, I propose the following. > >Add dateLastAccessed as a subelement under location because it is relevant >only to a date accessed at a particular location and not to the record as >a whole. It would use the dateType definitions. > >I don't see a need to change dateValid. Although Ray suggested calling it >dateApplicable, I'm not sure I see the advantage to that. Its meaning is >explained in the guidelines. "dateValid" is used for a subfield of 046 in >MARC to mean the same thing and is a Dublin Core term as well. > >Does anyone object to this approach? > >Rebecca > >On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress wrote: > > > I think the discussion of date accessed has mixed together the following: > > > > (1) The last time someone viewed the resource. (An indication of how much > > interest there is. If the date is a year ago, not much interest. If > it's one > > minute ago, more interest.) > > (2) The last time that someone responsible for the resource said it was up > > to date. > > (3)The time when this resource becomes (or became) valid. Like a train > > schedule. > > (4) The last time it was accessed by a specific url. > > > > Now I think that Rebecca had (1) in mind, but that Bruce thought it was (2) > > and suggested that that was really "date valid" which we already have, to > > which Rebecca responded "no, date valid is (3)". And I think that (4) is > > extraneous to the discussion and just adds un-necessary complexity. > > > > Aside from my editorializing about (4), is my interpretation of this > > discussion (roughly) accurate? > > > > --Ray > > > > ---------------------------------------------- Karen Coyle [log in to unmask] http://www.kcoyle.net ----------------------------------------------