As a minimalist, I agree with Diane Hillmann's analysis of
the results of the "date pristine". Even with qualifiers
date will be problematic. Diane's suggestion of
the element "date" without a definintion is excellent.
Rebecca Wesley (a.k.a. Lasher)
On Fri, 18 Jul 1997 14:17:24 -0400 (EDT) "Diane I. Hillmann"
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Actually, I don't think we have to go that far. As a recent convert and
> proponent the "date pristine," I hasten to point out that even if several
> DC.date.whatevers reside in a particular record, if the search engine
> doesn't understand the "whatever" and just treats them all as the kind of
> date it prefers, what's the harm? At least from a discovery point of view,
> that is.
>
> It's only if the date gets ignored because the qualifier isn't understood
> that we run into trouble.
>
> >someone truly searching for a work with 1997 intellectual content would
> >not be well served by pulling up everything that was digitized in 1997.
>
> This is true, but, if qualifying dates is important for the searcher, and
> the engine understands the qualifier and sorts out those that are not so
> qualified, what's the problem? Who was it suspended the law of caveat
> emptor?
>
> I don't think we're in a position here to mandate qualifiers for all uses
> of Dublin Core dates. I admit to a bit of hysterical giggling when I come
> across these messages about "mandating" this or that standard. To those of
> you who don't know, I am somewhat famous for whipping out a baseball cap
> with the logo "USMARC Police" at ALA/MARBI meetings when people start
> talking about "enforcement" of data standards. So when we mandate
> qualifiers, will we make Stu wear a "DC Police" hat (and will Marion Barry
> admit to knowing him?).
>
> I don't think so. Coverage may be a different story, since nobody but the
> spatial info folks worry much about it, much less understand it. Date is
> for everyone, and cannot be denied to the unwashed masses.
>
> >I myself am _not_ being churlish, you understand, though some of my best
> >friends are churls.
>
> So, Robin, which of your best friends are churls? I promise I'll never
> reveal their names to a soul!
>
> Diane
>
>
>
|