Dear all,
first of all thanks for this brainstorming.
Following some suggestions and hints I would like to provide a
very practical and concrete proposal for managing the good
issues arisen by Grant.
First of all the term "resolution" is it not a good term because
we have other important institutions that use the SAME term in a
very different way:
UN resolution
http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=
A/RES/66/279; administrative resolution;
European Council resolution;
EU parliament resolution
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2012-386.
I think it is important to find a solution where everybody could
be comfortable.
"Statement" is a good alternative to "resolution".
Second I would like to split the problems. From my point of view
there are three parameters involved in the discussion:
• Normative/non-normative legal document (e.g. resolution
could be non-normative)
• Official/non-official legal document (e.g. non-positive
title of the code is non-official)
• Draft/Approved (e.g. bill in UK is a draft bill presented
officially to the Parliament following a specific protocol - by
the way draft-bill is a particular type of document in UK - see
http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/laws/draft/).
These three parameters are more or less what Grant need to
distinguish. We have at the end these types to manage:
- draft, resolution, non-normative, official
- draft, resolution, normative, official
- approved, resolution, non-normative, official
- approved, resolution, normative, official
- code non-normative unofficial
- code normative official
- amendment, non-normative, official
- etc.
These parameters are mostly metadata and some of them need
interpretation.
The duplication of doc type it is a design chose quite in
contrast with the Akoma Ntoso pattern oriented principle.
See my proposal below:
Case 1: draft resolution non-normative official
<bill name="statement">
<FRBRWork>
<FRBRthis
value="/us/bill/resolution/2008-12-19/23/main"/>
<FRBRuri
value="/us/bill/resolution/2008-12-19/23/main"/>
<FRBRdate date="2008-12-19"
name="Generation"/>
<FRBRauthor href=""
as="#author"/>
<FRBRsubtype value="resolution"
legalStatus="#non-normative">
<FRBRcountry value="us"/>
<FRBRnumber value="23"/>
</FRBRWork>
Case 2: - code non-normative unofficial
<documentCollection name="code">
<FRBRWork>
<FRBRthis
value="/us/bill/resolution/2008-12-19/23/main"/>
<FRBRuri
value="/us/bill/resolution/2008-12-19/23/main"/>
<FRBRdate date="2008-12-19"
name="Generation"/>
<FRBRauthor href="" as="#editor"/>
<FRBRsubtype value="resolution"
legalStatus="#non-normative">
<FRBRcountry value="us"/>
<FRBRnumber value="23"/>
</FRBRWork>
In brief:
- add name with a list of abstract values: code, statement
- use <FRBRsubtype value="resolution"
legalStatus="#non-normative">
- add new attribute legalStatus
- bill means draft and act means approved
- <FRBRauthor href="" as="#editor"/> gives the
authoritativeness of the document and how is the "father".
What do you think about this?
Yours,
Monica
Il 12/02/2013 13:42, Thomas R. Bruce ha scritto: