Thanks for asking for clarification.

I had initially meant using the "normal" attribute, but I would
appreciate thoughts on the former as well.  I see that our legacy
finding aids have dates in a variety of formats, and many <unitdates>
aren't even defined as such.  I would prefer not to hold off publishing
our EADs until all this is fixed, unless I'd be running some serious


Deena M. Schwimmer, Associate Archivist 

Yeshiva University Archives / 500 W. 185th St. / 6th Floor / New York,

NY 10033

email: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>  / phone: (212)

960-5451 / fax: (212) 960-0066



-----Original Message-----
From: Encoded Archival Description List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Michele Combs
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 1:09 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Normalization of Dates


Clarification: when you say "normalizing" do you mean "changing the way

the date is written to be in a consistent format" or do you mean "using

the normal attribute in the unitdate element" ?  


Michele C.



Michele R. Combs

Librarian for Manuscripts and Archives Processing

Special Collections Research Center

Syracuse University Library

222 Waverly Avenue

Syracuse, NY 13244

(315) 443-9758



>>> [log in to unmask] 7/9/2007 4:00:01 PM >>>

  I would appreciate thoughts on risks of not normalizing the dates of

legacy EADs before publishing them, at least in the short term, while we

don't have a facility to search across them.  

Thanks in advance,

Deena Schwimmer