Bug: DCLP and principal edition

[samosafuz]

I finalized TM 64677 this morning, and when I reviewed the file I noticed that the principal edition is absent from the displayed DCLP meta.

I seem to recall seeing this on another occasion, and I've now diagnosed the issue. In the XML, one finds the principal edition encoded as <bibl n="1" type="edition" subtype="principal">, whereas in other files (where the principal edition does display correctly) one finds <bibl n="1" type="publication" subtype="principal">.

The following 39 files all include the faulty code:

60614.xml
60539.xml
60698.xml
60296.xml
60668.xml
65146.xml
65385.xml
65056.xml
65367.xml
65612.xml
66070.xml
59496.xml
59447.xml
59556.xml
59953.xml
59847.xml
64846.xml
64173.xml
64612.xml
64391.xml
64037.xml
64327.xml
64281.xml
61246.xml
61800.xml
61608.xml
61311.xml
62505.xml
62680.xml
62724.xml
62492.xml
62151.xml
129740.xml
63194.xml
63786.xml
63602.xml
69036.xml
121928.xml
121929.xml

I tested a random sample of these files and, indeed, none of them currently display the principal edition in PN.

It's easy enough to correct the XML, but I'm flagging this issue because something has gone wrong in the DCLP metadata mask: faulty XML is being produced when @principal is selected from the biblio dropdown menu. I'm not sure how this came about.

In the case of TM 64677 (FWIW), the default edition type was @reference (i.e., <bibl type="reference" subtype="principal">) and I updated it to @principal in the course of finalizing the file. It is perhaps the case that changing from one edition type to @principal in the dropdown menu is the problem. But it may also be systemic.