Look to outside resources/examples for improvements to DACS

[DonnellyW]

Principle 1. Archival description expresses professional ethics and values.

When trying to make improvements that will produce trust, encourage a diverse archival record, hold archivists accountable to users and each other, and privilege equitable access and accessibility, we can look to other resources for inspiration and guidance. Before and certainly since 2020 a number of institutions and partnerships have created and made available resources to help archivists create more conscious description.

Some examples of resources include:
https://archivesforblacklives.files.wordpress.com/2019/10/ardr_final.pdf
https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/jointprocessingguidelines/consciousandinclusivedescription
https://library.duke.edu/rubenstein/about/technical-services-department/guiding-principles-description
https://help.oac.cdlib.org/support/solutions/articles/9000198722-shared-readings-resources-and-considerations-inclusive-practices-for-access-and-description

I expect that this will require a

• Major change to DACS

Link(s) to any relevant part(s) of DACS

label

[faithc]

Just want to add a couple of thoughts to this suggestion, including a recommendation that DACS include key instruction/guidance that's outlined in resources focused on ethical description, including those mentioned above, throughout the standard, particularly as part of the front matter (which relates to #65). This could include instruction for inclusive archivist-supplied description; providing context for description that is creator based; and the need for community collaboration to use description that communities would use to described themselves.