Re: [legalcite-markup-discuss] Jurisdictional scope

[Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Frank,

On 09/29/2013 08:33 AM, Frank Bennett wrote:
> Patrick raises an important point about jurisdictional scope. From
> his note to another thread:
> 
> *****
> 
> Link:
> https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/legalcite-markup-discuss/201309/msg00004.html
>
>  *****
> 
> I think that it is important to keep world-wide scope in view,
> while acknowledging both that we can't get there in one go, and
> that it will be an ever-receding target (which does not conflict
> with Patrick's point, as I understand it).
> 

No conflict at all.

> This got me to thinking, and I have a couple of questions. For 
> world-wide (and historical) coverage, we would need a set of
> concrete jurisdiction specifiers, such as contemplated by the
> LEX:URN draft. Also, within a given jurisdiction there is a finite
> number of reporters/sources for primary legal text, with local
> conventions for their abbreviation in citations. Both of these
> (jurisdiction identifiers and journal abbreviations) are areas
> where there is a fair amount of variance across projects, and a
> good deal of chaos out in the wild. Is the establishment (and
> maintenance) of canonical lists for these two (for the latter, at
> least for the US jurisdiction, initially) within the scope of the
> proposal?
> 

I would hope both jurisdictional identifiers and journal
abbreviations, from digital projects as well as "in the wild" as you
say would be within the scope of the project.

Particularly your suggestion that such lists should be established and
maintained.

I am especially interested that such lists capture the variants of
identifiers and abbreviations, machine readable and otherwise.

I say that because establishing "another" set of identifiers or
abbreviations, even with much improved metadata, confronts adopters of
prior solutions with a choice of re-writing existing systems in order
to take advantage of the improved metadata.

Some will, some won't, hard to say where the tipping point would be
for that decision.

However, if the TC develops such lists, along with its identifiers,
and the identifiers/abbreviations used by others, the transition
process to obtain the benefits of the better metadata has a much lower
learning curve and adoption ramp.

That is another project or adopters of another project can still use
their present identifiers and yet access and deliver the same metadata
that is produced for the canonical lists of identifiers and abbreviations.

Eventually some of the current identifier systems will fall into
disuse but the maintenance of the canonical lists will mean that data
using those identifiers need never go "dark" with regard to its
identifiers.

In terms of immediate benefits, both jurisdiction and journl
abbreviation lists + metadata would form the basis for citation
checkers (depending on how much metadata we collect). Not that the TC
need sponsor such an application but I suspect law libraries could be
interested in creating and sharing such an application.

I looked briefly at citation software but what I saw was geared
towards entering the citation in the correct form, not checking to see
if the citation was correct. I assume that if we have volume by volume
metadata, then checking the correctness of cites becomes mechnical.

Hope everyone is having a great week!

Patrick

> Frank
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
legalcite-markup-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> legalcite-markup-discuss-help@lists.oasis-open.org
> 

- -- 
Patrick Durusau
patrick@durusau.net
Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB)
Former Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)

Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage: http://www.durusau.net
Twitter: patrickDurusau
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=zNZU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----