cd
cd copied to clipboard
tdwg
Property:conditionsOfAccess
| Label | Conditions of Access |
| Definition | Information about who can access the collection being described or an indication of its security status. |
| Usage | |
| Existing property | |
| Existing class | |
| Existing property identifier | |
| Format | |
| Required | No |
| Repeatable | Yes |
| Constraints | |
| Examples | Open to the public |
| Notes | If available, this should be a URL to a stable policy page. For example, https://www.fieldmuseum.org/science/research/area/fossils-meteorites/fossils-meteorites-policies. |
In the BBQ, we discussed what "resource" here (& in a few other fields, e.g. license) refers to. Added a note above to clarify: "accessRights" here refers to access to the Collections Description record (which is consistent with the term's use in DwC)
@qgroom recommends a separate physicalAccessRights in the Object Group Class, to cover access rights to the physical collection.
I am not sure if this property is useful as part of a description? Having one for physical access rights makes sense but for this one it would mean that you send a full description record to an application to then discover that access is restricted, not very secure. Should that not be handled separate as part of operations you can perform on a record?
I am not sure if this property is useful as part of a description? Having one for physical access rights makes sense but for this one it would mean that you send a full description record to an application to then discover that access is restricted, not very secure. Should that not be handled separate as part of operations you can perform on a record?
Yes, I kind of feel the same way. I was only convinced by the analogy to Darwin Core that does the same thing. Though I think this doesn't make much sense in Darwin Core either.
The accessRights term in dc seems to relate to the digital resource and in our case we want to allow the record creator to provide a link to information about access to the physical collection, suggest changing the property name to accessConditions.
Just to add a bit more details from todays discussion. This term is based on https://schema.org/conditionsOfAccess , with the difference that this is only meant for physical access, whereas the schema.org term is meant for both physical and digital access.
