We’ve recently discovered that most archetypes (for example Adverse reaction risk) have the copyright statement under the original language only, while at least one (Occupation record) has the copyright statement also in the Norwegian translation. The CKM also doesn’t show the copyright statement when looking at a translation of any archetype which doesn’t have the field repeated under that translation. Is this correct behaviour?
The copyright has moved from RESOURCE_DESCRIPTION_ITEM in 1.4. to RESOURCE_DESCRIPTION in 2.
Essentially this means it no longer applies for one language only, but for the archetype as a whole.
@pieterbos Is what I say correct - the current conversion of the Occupation archetype seems to keep the language specific copyrights as they are?
We could add the display the language specific copyright for 1.4 archetypes…we just never have because I think the above change was discussed because at the time nobody had ever really used copyright beyond the original language (and then it was meant to be for the archetype as a whole, not only one translation).