Submitted a PR that addresses the most recent set of PUI PDF issues – more detail at

I tested this again against the things I found back in November, using the smae record (https://test.archivesspace.org/repositories/2/resources/13) and all seem to have been fixed except the Collection ID issue. This is still being duplicated in the Staff PDF.

I also checked against what Brianna found, and found the same things in the record I tested, when they existed.

I tested https://test.archivesspace.org/staff/resources/11#tree::resource_11

Differences:

• Collection ID duplicated in SUI PDF

• ID [ark] is hyperlinked on SUI PDF whereas it appears as ark:/99999/1 on PUI PDF

• Date [bulk] has additional language in PUI PDF (e.g. “1998-2005” vs “Majority of material found within 1998-2005”)

• Language of material is in the SUI PDF, but not the PUI PDF.

• Publication statement is in different order

• Arrangement note is duplicated in PUI PDF. They’re on the top and bottom of the same page (pg 6 in my example)

• Preferred citation note is duplicated in PUI PDF. One is immediately after the abstract, and the other is above processing information

• Line breaks are not retained in processing information note in PUI PDF (I’m guessing this is not isolated in the processing information note)

• Controlled access headings are in a different order in both SUI and PUI PDF. It appears that the PUI PDF alphabetized within agents and subjects, but I can’t identify an order for the SUI PDF.

• Collection inventory for SUI PDF looks significantly cleaner than the PUI PDF. The text sizes seem all off. I think the Instances columns are justified right, which doesn’t look as clean. There’s way too much empty space. I think the text should be wrapped, at least.

I tested and and found similar results as my colleagues.

The biggest issue was that instance information was dropped from the Susan H. Kelly and Anne C. Williams collection. Those instances have only a top container and not a child type or child indicator, the same is true of the collection Ryan tested that didn’t include instance info. The Midori collection has both top containers and child indicators in the instances, and those export successfully. Perhaps that’s the issue with them being dropped?

I also agree with Elizabeth about the preference for title wrapping on archival objects, and the issues Austin noted.

I used the following finding aide to test against: . Here is what I found:

1. I found the same thing as Elizabeth and Austin with regards to the reported date issue, and it appears to have been fixed.

2. I found the same thing as Elizabeth, and the collection ID is still being duplicated on the staff PDF, without a space between the two.

3. I did not see any issues with note readability on the Public PDF. However, I did notice in the one I tested that “Language of Material” and “Scope and Content” notes in the Collection Inventory are in different places on the PUI and staff PDFs. Also, on the staff side, it says “Language of the Material” but PDF is “Language of the Materials” on staff, and on the PUI this note is bold, but on staff it is underlined. (see attached clip)

4. For instances, on the one I tested, the instance information appears to be completely missing from the PUI PDF. (see attached clip) So, while I am not seeing the issue that was reported, there seems to be another issue that has crept in that is deleting Instance information from the PUI PDF, or possibly just being cutoff.