[metadataLibrarians] DC subject.other

[Diane I. Hillmann]

Folks:

Sorry to be late to the conversation, but I think Sherman has 
identified the critical question. If indeed the dates are associated 
with an agent, they belong in an agent description (putting them as 
part of an agent string has been a long standing kludge which I'm not 
gonna discuss here!) because they really are not descriptive of the 
resource.

It struck me as I was thinking about replying to this thread, that 
there was another possibility. If you are using the dates to convey 
some notion of the temporal context of the resource, because you have 
a collection of items and no one date that relates to the whole 
resource, you might want to use Coverage, or Temporal (a refinement 
of coverage), where you can use a range of dates or a named period.

Diane Hillmann
Editor, "Using Dublin Core"

>Dear Jane, Jason and others --
>Are the "birth-death-marriage" dates attributes of authors, creators,
>or agents? If so, I wonder if you even want them in a subject field.
>
>As life dates, they would probably be better in the agent field even if
>you can't subfield them apart from name elements. If you enter them
>consistently (last name, first name, date(s), or with more text), you
>might be able to manipulate them later for another iteration or
>migration.
>
>If resource dates, they probably belong in a date field.
>
>Sherman Clarke
>NYU Libraries
>sherman.clarke at nyu.edu
>_______________________________________________
>metadatalibrarians mailing list
>metadatalibrarians at lists.monarchos.com
>http://lists.monarchos.com/listinfo.cgi/metadatalibrarians-monarchos.com