...
Introductions
Metadata Tickets
Proposed answer for ANW-697:
The metadata standards subgroup examined this ticket. The developers correctly implemented the new language specification as written. However, we consulted with Cory Nimer, the primary author of the new language spec, and he suggested that in this particular case (EAD2002 Language of Description export), the spec is incorrect. Req-4 for Language of Description should have been written similarly to Req-5 for Language of Materials, where the EAD2002 export behavior of language of description mimics that of language of materials, basically: if a free-text note exists export that, otherwise export the translation of the encoded language as a text strings with the codes in attributes, with some boilerplate.The subgroup proposes the following guideline:
The system shall export Language of Description, Script of Description, and Language of Description Note field content in EAD2002 records, when available.
If a Language of Description Note is available, export only that:
<langusage>[Language of Description Note, if any]</langusage>
If no Language of Description Note is available, export the Language field translation values for the Language and Script subrecord, separated by commas, enclosed in a <language> element with associated @langcode and @scriptcode attribute values, and terminated by a period.
<langusage>Description is written in:
<language langcode="[Language of Description (code value)]">[Language of Description (translation value)]</language> <script scriptcode="[(Script of Description (code value))]">
[Script of Description (translation value)].</script>
</langusage>
<langusage>Description is written in:
<language langcode="eng">English</language> <script scriptcode="Latn">
(Latin)</script>.
</langusage>