HTML is not consistent in adding the comma to the 5 digit shelmark

[davidamichelson]

In the main header we don't have it, but in manuscripts with MS Parts we do. See picture showing both 17266 and 17,266

I think we decided to consider the non-comma version as the canonical one? Right? This would mean changing MS part display in two places, the table of contents for the page and the header for the msPart.

Thoughts?

[wlpotter]

The MS Parts are coming from the BL-Shelfmark (//msPart/msIdentifier/altIdentifier/idno); the version without the comma is from //titleStmt/title[@level="a"].

I believe the version with comma is how Wright has it; without commas was based, I think, on how the BL listed their shelf marks

fwiw it might be easier to target the titles and add a comma using regex than it would to remove the comma from the shelf mark idnos