I guess overwhelming silence means that we all think the workplan and
revised charter are OK?  I certainly think the revised charter is
fine, as it was written in Eric Childress's message of 19 Jan 2004.

As I was reading the workplan, I did wonder about one thing.  I'm
relatively new to the world of formal metadata standards, coming at
this from an IT/database background.  I'm wondering about a way to
capture the date the *record* was created or revised, as opposed to
the *resource* the record describes?  Do others worry about this?  Is
this beyond the purview of DC-DATE or of the Dublin Core itself?
Other than that question of mine, I think the proposed workplan is
good.

As for the working group itself, I'm also new to these.  I wonder if
it's worth having a mechanism for members to respond to queries such
as "does this look OK" with something resembling a poll?  I don't
mean that we should formally vote, but I'm imagining an appropriate
reluctance for many people to write to the whole membership
with "looks OK to me" which would get tedious in quantity.  If we had
a polling service, we could at least get some sense that the message
has been read and met with approval.  Obviously, those of us with
comments or questions would put them to the membership.  How have
other groups handled this?

Cheers,
 Scott

Scott A. Gunn
Senior Technology Associate
Education Development Center, Inc.