VEP-012: date_role#Validated

[Markus Demleitner]

Dear Semantics, dear Registry,

[followups suggested to both groups]

On behalf of myself (as its author), let me announce VEP-012, which
is about the date_role vocabulary used by VOResource (the
curation/date/@role attribute).

Semantics WG: This is also a test run for the new, github-based VEP
process.  If you want a sneak preview at the current docs, see
appendix C of a current VocInVO build
<http://docs.g-vo.org/Vocabularies.pdf>, or the new-vep-instructions
branch in https://github.com/msdemlei/vocinvo.  Feedback on this is
of course welcome, too.

With this -- here's VEP-012:

Vocabulary: http://www.ivoa.net/rdf/date_role
Author: Markus Demleitner <msdemlei at ari.uni-heidelberg.de>
Date: 2022-03-07

New Term: Validated
Action: Addition
Label: Last validated
Description: Dates with this role indicate when the resource has last
  undergone a non-formal validation.  This will usually involve a human
  ensuring that the resource still works as expectable, both technically
  and as regards science content.  The prototypical case is when tutors
  ensure a written tutorial still describes the real behaviour of
  clients and services.
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
  validation 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:Validation.  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:
  The identifier "Validated" perhaps is not ideal as there already is
  an identifier "Valid" in date_role from DataCite, which denotes
  something entirely different.  One might consider using "LastChecked"
  for the present concept instead.  The author of this VEP could easily
  be swayed to prefer that, but for now believes the risk of people
  confusing "Valid" and "Validated" is sufficiently low to be taken for
  the benefit of not having camel case identifiers.

Opinions?  Suggestions on how to improve this?

Thanks,

          Markus