Re: [legaldocml] RE : [legaldocml] Acts and bills

["Thomas R. Bruce" <tom@liicornell.org>]

On 2/12/13 8:17 AM, monica.palmirani wrote:
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?

Does the subtype value take the local name?  Or is it a controlled vocabulary of abstract subtypes?  The problem that I think we have is that people will want to see the name they actually use for the thing somewhere.  So, if they decide for some misbegotten reason to call this particular type of document a "binky", would it be

<FRBRsubtype value="binky" legalStatus="#non-normative">

That is, of course, assuming that a binky is non-normative :).   And speaking of norms, there are an awful lot of folks on this TC that we haven't heard from yet, many of whom I know have a lot of experience with fieldwork and adoption processes.  Anyone?  (I'm lookin' at *you*, Laurel Shifrin :) )

t.

--
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
Thomas R. Bruce
Director, Legal Information Institute
Cornell Law School
http://www.law.cornell.edu twitter: @trbruce
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+