Closed areisemann closed 9 years ago
yes, it is strange. farther on in the record, there is another
The date range of this item was actually 30-50 (as in almost 2000 years ago). I changed the sample data to use only 4-digit years and changed the unitdate to be formatted with two years separated with a dash instead of a slash when there is a begin year & end year.
i'm not sure sure if this is a bug or if this is essentially a typo. the date given for this item is "30/50". when you look at the EAD record, this value is entered for the element. that is wierd. given that the unitdate type is "bulk", the values entered should be a clearly recognizable range of years.
--http://www.loc.gov/ead/tglib/elements/unitdate.html