Refined elements: Access rights, Is Part of, Type

[juhahakala]

Access rights

DCMI Metadata Terms: http://purl.org/dc/terms/accessRights

Label: Access Rights

Current definition of this property in the DCMI Terms namespace is: “Information about who can access the resource or an indication of its security status.”

This is not applicable to scholarly resources. Their access rights are usually not based on security status nor do rights metadata normally specify who can access a scholarly resource. Moreover, there is no recommendation to use a controlled vocabulary, which may undermine semantic interoperability.

The following note could be added to the DCMI Terms or, alternatively, to the user guide:

For scholarly resources, the recommended practice is to use the COAR (Confederation of Open Access Repositories) vocabulary of access rights (http://vocabularies.coar-repositories.org/documentation/access_rights/).

Version 1.0 of the vocabulary contains the following terms: • open access • embargoed access • restricted access • metadata only access

-- Discussion --

Is Part Of

DCMI Metadata Terms: http://purl.org/dc/terms/isPartOf

This property can be used to specify host document, a related resource in which the described scholarly resource is physically or logically included.

Recommended practice is to use the COAR Controlled Vocabulary for Resource Type Genres for the description of host document types.

Recommended practice is to identify the related resource by means of a URI. If this is not possible or feasible, a string conforming to a formal identification system or a name may be provided. It is also possible to give both the name and the URI.

“Is Part Of” in DCMI Terms shall be used to provide a link (URI) from the described component part (“child”) to the host resource (“parent”).

Note: There are no practical examples in DCMI Terms or DC User guide on how to use this property in cases that are common for scientific publications, such as linking from an article to conference proceedings or periodicals. User guide and/or DCMI Terms should be revised to accommodate relevant use cases.

-- Discussion --

Type

DCMI Metadata Terms: http://purl.org/dc/terms/type

Label: Type

The Dublin Core DCMI Type Vocabulary is general and as such not ideally suited for scholarly resources.

In SRAP, the use of COAR Controlled Vocabulary for Resource Type Genres (Version 2.0, at http://vocabularies.coar-repositories.org/documentation/resource_types/) should be recommended either in DCMI Metadata Terms or in the DC User Guide.

For instance:

Recommended practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as the DCMI Type Vocabulary or the COAR Controlled Vocabulary for Resource Type Genres.

-- Discussion --

COAR vocabulary is detailed, and meets most requiremens. Flipside of the coin is that finding the most suitable term might be difficult. For instance, reports can be further divided into: -- report part -- internal report -- memorandum -- other type of report -- policy report -- project deliverable -- data management plan -- report to funding agency -- research report -- technical report

[juhahakala]

Proposed usage of accessRights already indicated that the existence of embargo should be described with this element, using COAR term embargoed access. This is now taken into account also in the embargo related discussion, which in its latest form proposes two new elements, hasEmbargoDate and hasEmbargoDuration, from FaBiO.

[kcoyle]

I'll note here that there is a system of "access" that is at the publisher level, e.g. the Gold Open Access Journals list. I don't know to what extent that is only from today forward or if it applies to historical works by those publishers. Access, at least in terms of "open" or "closed" can be at the publisher level, not at the resource level.