Encoded Archival Description (EAD) is nearing completion and formal release as a standard. EAD attempts to overcome obstacles to intellectual access for geographically distributed primary resources by providing a standard encoding structure for archival finding aids. EAD is the most recent in a line of similar efforts to address universal intellectual access to such data, and like its predecessors, EAD applies emerging technology to the problem. The technology underlying EAD is Standard Generalized Markup Language (SGML) and Extensible Markup Language (XML). This article reviews the background of EAD and the contributions of archivists in both large and small repositories to its development.

Encoded Archival Description (EAD) is part of the mainstream of archival standards development. The work of the National Information Systems Task Force in creating the MARC AMC format and the concomitant development of Archives, Personal Papers, and Manuscripts helped define the basic framework of shared archival description. The architects of EAD have built upon this architecture and provided archivists with technology-based tools capable of producing a fully integrated descriptive apparatus in an Internet environment that are nonetheless firmly rooted in archival principles and traditions.

Document representations are gradually moving from format orientation to a more structural orientation, where their internal structure is made available to the machine for more effective processing. This is very much like the move of databases toward more explicit, unambiguous, standardized forms. The data found in documents is quite different from traditional, tabular database records, however, and requires new models. SGML has been at the center of this move because of some very simple characteristics, such as allowing authors to create the particular labels needed for their specific applications. These characteristics led to its use by the Text Encoding Initiative and for Encoded Archival Description. Finding aids pose some uniquely challenging problems for encoding, now addressed by EAD in a way that should make such information far more accessible for the future.

Encoded Archival Description (EAD), the SGML Document Type Definition (DTD) for archival finding aids, has been under development for more than three years. Although it has been significantly improved during that time by feedback from early implementers and by new insights from its developers, much of EAD's basic structure dates from the design team's first meeting in July 1995 at the Bentley Historical Library in Ann Arbor, Michigan. During that week-long gathering, the EAD design team articulated its observations about traditional archival finding aids, established design goals and principles, and created the framework for the current version 1.0 DTD structure. This article examines the basic steps in building an SGML DTD and provides a structural analysis of EAD's high-level elements in light of the developers' early design goals and decisions.

The implementation of Encoded Archival Description involves the same programmatic and administrative concerns encountered when undertaking any new initiative. To be successful, EAD must fit within the institution's budget, priorities, and strategic vision; benefits must be carefully weighed against costs. Administrators need to understand the implications of initial and ongoing staff costs, outsourcing possibilities, the role of consortial initiatives, training requirements, workflow management, hardware and software requirements and costs, and technical support needs as they select from among several options for creating and publishing EAD-encoded finding aids.

Encoded Archival Description has a great deal of potential as an archival descriptive standard. Not only is it a data structure that is widely applicable to a variety of institutions and collection types on an international scale, it may also foster common practices regarding data content for finding aids. To become an official SAA descriptive standard, EAD must pass through a rigorous internal review process and be accepted by the archival community.