VEP-013.txt

Vocabulary: http://www.ivoa.net/rdf/voresource/date_role
Author: Markus Demleitner <msdemlei@ari.uni-heidelberg.de>
Date: 2022-03-15
Supercedes: VEP-012

New Term: Inspected
Action: Addition
Label: Last Inspected
Description: Dates with this role indicate when the resource has last
  undergone a non-formal inspection, typically by a human, as to whether
  it is still working as expectable, both technically and as regards
  science content.
Relationships: 
Used-in: The registry record ivo://edu.gavo.org/hd/gavo_addpms (and most
  other IVOA document records; cf.
  <http://dc.zah.uni-heidelberg.de/wirr/q/ui/fixed?field0=restype&operator0=%3D&operand0=doc%3Adocument>)

Rationale: 
  The prototypical case is for tutorials, where the date of the last
  inspection as given in the document's registry record (in
  curation/date) is a good indication for the amount of work that might
  be necessary to use the tutorial in teaching VO technology -- or, in
  self-study, how many deviations of actual behaviour are to be
  expected.  The directory of registered texts at
  http://dc.g-vo.org/VOTT lets users sort the results by this date
  ("Date Checked").

  It is conceivable that data centers use this concept for data
  services, too, for instance as part of a certification procedure,
  but the author does not see that as an immediate need.

  This term is not intended for use with vr:validationLevel.  For one,
  even validation level 4 only applies to the registry record rather
  than the resource itself, and hence the concept does not apply anyway.
  In addition, validationLevel elements are, if at all, added by
  harvestable full registries which must not modify the records outside
  of the validationLevel elements and hence could not add curation/date
  elements anyway.

  The non-standard, mixed-case form of the concept identifier is for
  consistency with the other terms in the vocabulary, which again
  preserve the form of DataCite date roles.

Discussion:
  This concept was first proposed as #Validated.  During the Semantics
  Calls 6 telecon, it was found that this identifier is too close to the
  existing #Valid (with an entirely different meaning), and that a
  different identifier would also clearly distance the concept from
  vr:validationLevel.  After some consideration, #Inspected seemed to
  suitably convey the intended usage.