A. Boer TIME and VERSIONS Alexander Boer Leibniz Center for Law University of Amsterdam.
Transcript of A. Boer TIME and VERSIONS Alexander Boer Leibniz Center for Law University of Amsterdam.
Summary
Dies consulti, dies signum Not versioning, not always there in lower
regulations
Dies edicti: date-publicationDies coactu: date-enacted (inwerkingtreding)Dies valens: date-effective (.. werking)Date of modification = dies coactu of modifying provision
Overview
METALex Exchange vs. METALex StoreDesign requirementsMETALex StoreVersions and IdentityLegislation lifecycleSummary
Exchange vs. Store
Limitations of Exchanging documents Aboutness = information about doc X is part
of doc Y (e.g. date of repeal) Completeness = There is only incomplete
information about YSolution for exchange: Explicitly exclude information about a
document that is not easily, or customarily maintained in a store.
Include good references to a store with global identifiers.
Example: date-repealed
Repealing Legislation Repeal
RepealedLegislation
LegislationAttributing
Competence to repeal
2004/12/12
input
output
output
input
at
type type type
type
Enact
Example: date-repealed
Repealing Legislation Repeal
RepealedLegislation
LegislationAttributing
Competence to repeal
2004/12/12
input
output
output
input
@
type type type
type
Enact
Metadata:
Date-repealed=
“2004/12/12”
about
“12 december 2004” ????
substring
Requirements
Independence of jurisdiction; When in doubt, leave it out No exotic options for jurisdictions
Independence of user languageExtensibility; Make the easy things easy, the hard things possibleUse W3C standards for the purposes for which they are intendedIntegrate with common and free software
Use of W3C standards
Equivalent XML schema and RDF schemaXSL (eXtensible Stylesheet Language) for transformation between languages, METALex and RDF, and METALex and XHTMLNamespaces and static URL and URN names for `global identity’ regulations, persons, and public bodiesXML Linking and XPointer support for references
Requirements Exchange
Functional requirements: Presentation in XHTML and definition in XML Translation to XML/SGML/HTML standards Translation to RDF/OWL for store Search and filtering on any meaningful level
of granularity Global identity and references Description of temporal validity and change Embedding in XML technologies for storage,
transfer, knowledge representation, code generation, rule generation, and verification
Requirements StoreFunctional requirements:
Presentation in XHTML, definition in RDF/OWL, (de)serialization in METALex XML
Search and filtering on any meaningful level of granularity
Global identity, HTTP access, references, and description of the semantic relations between regulations
Management of temporal validity and change Incomplete versions for legislative drafting Embedding in XML technologies for storage, transfer,
knowledge representation, code generation, rule generation, and verification
Example Store (DTCA)
HTTP GET HTTP GET
Cocoon: reply filtering, translation to HTML, input forms, URL sitemap, load balancing, etc.
CMS: answering queries, updating, text search, parsing
Jena: storage of RDF
Racer: inference, consistency
Content Content
HTTP GET/POST
HTTP POST (DIG XML)
HTTP GET/POST
RDF example
ConstitutionArticle 81Article 89
Article 134Article 134, lid 1
Law,Delegation
CompetenceArt. 134 Royal Decree,
AMVB, Creationof SER
Regulation(binding
employees and
employers)
Government and States General
Government
Social-economic Council (SER)
Attribution
AttributionAttribution
Attribution
Attribution
Subdelegation
Delegation
Example: date-repealed
Repealing Legislation Repeal
RepealedLegislation
LegislationAttributing
Competence to repeal
2004/12/12
input
output
output
input
at
type type type
type
Enact
Advantages of RDF
1. Statement about something is the representational primitive: (subject, predicate, object)
2. URI `identity’ of Regulation and XML documents (files) are separated; A statement can be stored anywhere
3. Capable of storing incomplete models of a regulation
4. Uses global URI identity for non-retrievable objects; persons, acts, events, competences, decisions, etc.
5. RDF can be used to `encode’ UML, OWL and other software engineering languages
Versions and Identity
A Regulation is One regulation, but different versions Publication, XML document, RDF model, signed paper? Not draft legislation or proposed legislation?
Reference is to a version (of local part) of a Regulation on a date in a language?
Reference to identity is an injective function, e.g. publication source, citation title, database key
Also reference to identity of reference, e.g. intranet table that refers to XML documents of publisher)
Citation (art. 1 Constitution) vs. reference (that Law, specific regulation, our Minister)
Versions and Identity
Globally unique identity regulation: URI, URN, URLLocally unique identity regulation in (globally unique) namespace: ID for XML/RDF or XPath for XMLHow to obtain XML/RDF content for a reference is unspecified!
<Reference xlink:href=“global#local” ref-date=“time point”>textual reference object
</Reference>
Versions and Identity
XML/RDF model is not always complete representation of all versions wrt. language or timeRepresentation of time versions was correct (not complete) on date-versionTime intervals should therefore be closed in incomplete XML/RDF model
Time and Versions
Date-repealed, date-enacted, date-publicationDate-version and “date-of-interest”!Date-ref on a reference
If missing by default the current version (date-version)!
Date-effective Semantics cannot be fixed in a standard
which pretends to be jurisdiction-independent
Example: date-repealed
Repealing Legislation Repeal
RepealedLegislation
LegislationAttributing
Competence to repeal
2004/12/12
input
output
output
input
@
type type type
type
Enact
Metadata:
Date-repealed=
“2004/12/12”
about
“12 december 2004” ????
substring
Legislation lifecycle
Fix (sign) L at T by A with competence C attributed by L’Publish L at T by A with competence C attributed by L’Enact L at T in L’’ by A with competence C attributed by L’Repeal L at T in L’’ by A with competence C attributed by L’Change L at T in L’’ by A with competence C attributed by L’
L and L’’ are different objects, but versions of the same abstract object
L’’ was published at the date the change was made
Complications
relative dates of change, enact, retract (two weeks after) The date may occur in no document as a
string!
the importance of date-version Future changes may not lead to an
unambiguous (consolidated) version (yet)
Date-enacted vs. effective/applicable
Example: date-repealed
Repealing Legislation Repeal
RepealedLegislation
LegislationAttributing
Competence to repeal
2004/12/12
input
output
output
input
at
type type type
type
Enact
Competence/Power
Acting Attributing a competence to Y to do X Taking a competence to do X from Y Using a competence to do X Mandating Y to do X
Submandating Y to do X Delegating a competence to do X to Y
Subdelegating a competence to do X to Y (Autodelegation/Allodelegation)
Change
Dates when active, when is the change made? to what (which version) is the change
therefore made?
looking into the future...Temporary changesStacking changes on one date minimizing number of consolidated versions Jurisdiction-specific tiebreaker needed
Stacking changes
Tiebreaking rule Netherlands: date of enactment date of signing serial number of publication
This one always terminates
Summary
Future documents may be ambiguous nowURN vs URL not yet solved Authority/competence for URN
schemes Internally (DTCA) URL’s work fine
6+1 dates are really relevant Fix/Sign-date is candidate 7
Summary
Changes must to law be completely specified in law for version mangement Word change: Agreement in sentence
+ anaphoric reference
Parsing/understanding enactment, repeal, change clauses presuppose understanding of competence and relative dates
Summary
Dies consulti, dies signum Not versioning, not always there in lower
regulations
Dies edicti: date-publicationDies coactu: date-enacted (inwerkingtreding)Dies valens: date-effective (.. werking)Date of modification = dies coactu of modifying provision