This article's over three years old. The ossuary's inscription has been pretty conclusively proved to be a forgery in my understanding. (Links: 1, 2). Sorry.
A more current interpretation from another source. Not really wanting to debate the issue, but was saving articles that show the controversy is still being discussed and analyzed. Most believe the first part of the inscription is truly authentic. The problems deal mainly with the second part "brother of Jesus". I could see how that might be added later....by someone who knew....or someone who thought they could make a few bucks.
