 |
 |
> Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 09:01:51 -0400 > From: [log in to unmask] (Stu Weibel) > ... > would like to see a small number of clear date categories agreed upon and > specified in the reference definition. > > DC.date.copyright > DC.date.lastModified > DC.date.creation Relating this back to Misha's work on the 8601 profile (which I think is terrific, btw), has anyone noticed that the profile looks more like the specification of a "data type" than of "data semantics"? It's clear to me that the profile will apply to any number of elements that contain date-like things (DLTs ;-) ). Whether we define DC.date.copyright DC.date.lastModified DC.date.creation as sub-elements, as separate elements, or as future extensions, would anyone suggest that they _not_ share this data type profile? -John