review of metamodel

[Tara Athan <taraathan@gmail.com>]

I have attached a spreadsheet that I created while I was refreshing my 
memory about what was in our metamodel and how it related to the current 
LegalRuleML syntax. There has been little drift in this part of the 
work, so everything appears to be pretty much in alignment.

I only had a few questions:

1. "Roles" : we introduced these for authors, editors etc because a 
person could fill more than one kind of role with respect to different 
documents. However ontologically, the same distinction applies to 
authorities and jurisdictions. (I think Adam mentioned this earlier.) 
"Italy" could play the role of a jurisdiction in one reference, and a 
location of some event in another reference. I don't think we need to 
modify anything, we just need to recognize and address issues that may 
arise, such as the spatial extent may be context-dependent (e.g. 
maritime issues) and are certainly time-dependent.
)
2. LegalStatements & Constitutive, etc, Statements
We have not clarified the relationship between the metamodel category we 
call "LegalStatement", with corresponding LegalRuleML element 
lrml:LegalSource, and these "Statement" elements that wrap Rules.
We may have talked about this at some point, but I don't remember the 
outcome.

3. "Legal Source" is really a role that may be played by a legal 
statement, is it not? So concerns similar to those in #1 apply.

Attachment: MetaModelReview.xlsx
Description: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet