Hello,

In regard to the problem mentioned by the Radcliffe/Harvard EAD people
concering the use of of unitLoc (now the new <container>), we at UVA
encountered the same problem.

For example a list would read

Series I: Correspondence

Box 1
Randolph Family

Box 2
Jefferson Family

Miscellaneous


We would mark up this list accordingly (I'll use <container> for
simplicity):

<c01 level="series">
<did><unitTitle>Series I: Correspondence</unitTitle></did>

<c02 level="item"><did>
<unitTitle>Randolph Family</unitTitle>
<container>Box 1</container>
</did></c02>

<c02 level="item"><did>
<unitTitle>Jefferson Family</unitTitle>
<container>Box 2</container>
</did></c02>

and so forth.

I too was bothered by the fact I needed to add in the container into
container list entry.

But what I discovered was that the guides looked much better on the
web page screen when marked up that way.  For most of the guides we marked
up, if we had used illegal tagging for the guides to get that nice and
neat Series Box Folder Folder Box Folder Folder listing, the guides would
have been unreadeable on the web screen.  Many of the guides would have
displayed with the box listing on one screen and then not on the next.
This would have lead to confusion.  In fact when I discussed EAD with the
public services and other staff they liked the combination of the folder
and box listing.

(We compared an illegallly tagged guide (we treated the box as
another series listing instead of a <p>) to a properly marked one to see
the results.)

YMMV.

This may not address the concerns of Harvard/Radcliffe -- I do agree with
their concerns -- but just to say what we felt about the mark-up.

Elizabeth Slomba
UMD College Park, CLIS
University of Virginia