[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [legalxml-econtracts] The Clause Model
The DTD does not allow <text> elems inside of <text> elems. In HTML, <span> can be embedded within a <span>, a pattern widely used for formatting. Am I missing something? thanks. John >-----Original Message----- >From: Jason Harrop [mailto:jharrop@speedlegal.com] >Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 6:56 AM >To: Legalxml-Econtracts >Subject: [legalxml-econtracts] The Clause Model > > >Hi > >Following last week's teleconference, i was to write an evaluation of >the latest >incarnation of the clause model, as contained in Peter's document. > >Having thought further about the issues Peter identifies, and other >implications >of the model, i believe there are certain problems we've been trying >to address >which can't be solved without viewing things in a different light. >Fortunately, this is quite easy to do and doesn't mean throwing out >all our work >to date. > >I've attached my response in RTF, for ease of quotation etc. i won't get a >chance to test the RTF in various versions of Word until tomorrow, but please >let me know if there are any glitches. > >Also, I've copied below the summary for anyone who finds that more convenient. > >Looking forward to discussing this in Thursday's teleconf, and maybe before :) > >cheers, > >Jason > > >--------------------- > > >Summary > >It is the thesis of this document that everything turns on whether we >insist on >an element which represents a grammatical paragraph, so that a list (block or >inline) in a sentence can be encapsulated in that element: > ><Item> > <GrammaticalPara> > Here is a list of colours: > <Items> > <Item><Text>red,</Text></Item> > <Item><Text>green,</Text></Item> > <Item><Text>blue</Text></Item> > </Items> > </GrammaticalPara> ><Item> > >In the models the TC has been considering, the GrammaticalPara element >has been >labeled Para or Block. I call these Grammatical Paragraph models, and argue >that these models have certain inevitable consequences. The consequnces flow >from the fact that you can also do: > ><Item> > <GrammaticalPara> > Here is a list of colours: > </GrammaticalPara> > <Items> > <Item><Text>red,</Text></Item> > <Item><Text>green,</Text></Item> > <Item><Text>blue</Text></Item> > </Items> ><Item> > >On the other hand, if we decide that we do not need to model a grammatical >paragraph, but rather, are content with capturing blocks of text (a >typographical view), then a simpler model is available: > ><Item> > <Text>Here is a list of colours:</Text> > <Items> > <Item><Text>red,</Text></Item> > <Item><Text>green,</Text></Item> > <Item><Text>blue</Text></Item> > </Items> ></Item> > > I call models with this feature a Simple Paragraph Model (after DocBook's >"simpara" element)1. > >I suggest that in view of the difficulties sometimes encountered in asking >lawyers and other contract authors to choose between block-lists and >sub-clauses, the TC should adopt a Simple Paragraph Model. > >It completely avoids some of the technical difficulties which have >dogged us so >far, and is considerably easier for lawyers and other contract authors. > >By way of introduction, this document explains in more detail the outstanding >issues with lists and subclauses which we have been grappling with. > >It is these issues, and the insight that they are inherent in Grammatical >Paragraph Models,2 which leads us to a Simple Paragraph model. > >The model contained in Peter's "Structural markup – Basic clause model >proposal >and specification" document (draft 1.0 of 11 November 2003) is a Grammatical >Paragraph model. Hereinafter I refer to it (and that document as a >whole) as GP1. > >In my view, a Simple Paragraph Model offers us very considerable >advantages over >any Grammatical Paragraph Model. > >It is for this reason that the body of this document does not discuss the >specifics of GP1. > >If, following a comparison of Simple and Grammatical Paragraph Models, and a >discussion of their relative merits, the TC expresses a preference for a >Grammatical Paragraph Model, GP1 would need to be considered further. For this >reason, a critique of GP1 and recommendations for improving it are >contained in >Appendix 2. >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]