[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [legalruleml] Specifications and Namespace
Dear Harold, dear Adrian, and All, many thanks for your email and for your precious contribution. We see three interesting issues in your email: goals of LegalRuleML, methodology of work in the OASIS TC, content. 1. Concerning the goal of the LegalRuleML TC. The goal in the charter of LegalRuleML is to provide at the end a set of XML specifications that is able to represent the requirements of the legal domain as an extension of RuleML. In these months we focalized too much our attention on RuleML compliance rather than to follow the needs of the legal community. The AI&LAW community needs a vertical standard that is easy to use, conceptually close to the legal domain specificity, human readable, representative of the legal text. It is so true that LKIF-rule (Tom Gordon) has been proposed to address such issues (even if it lacks many important aspects) Sometime RuleML is too much neutral, it is very verbose and it makes difficult to express what is clearly expressed in the legal text. Specific operators for legal domain should make more clear the representation, help the legal expert to model norms. For me the XML schema, like in Akoma Ntoso, is, among the other puroposes, a didactical instrument for leading the norm representation and modelling. RuleML does not have these charateristics. So our goal is to develop: - legal defeasibility operators (e.g., override) - legal deontic (e.g., obligation, permission, violation, etc.) - legal temporal model (e.g., interval of efficacy of the norm) - legal metadata (e.g., source, references, author, etc.) - legal meta-rules in legal domain (e.g., modification, or atoms that call other rules) What we would ike to do is to model also meta-rules that we have not faced so far, but they were included in the manifesto and also in some papers by Guido and me. 2. Concerning the method of the OASIS TC. We have also the duty to not cannibalize the OASIS LegalRueML TC. Remember that the OASIS TCs IPR specifies: what we have discussed inside of the TC belongs to the TC namespace. So we think that override, key, keyref belongs to lmrl in principles, apart the namespace policy that we will decide to adopt (e.g. to use the same tags in LegalRuleML TC and also in RuleML, why not, without any namespace for both). 3. Concerning the content of the LegalRuleML. The refined schema is ok for us (if you remind we discussed it together in a thread) but we want to refine it again. Defeasibility could be generic, but also verticalized for legal domain (e.g., Guido papers). Temporal issues have to split in two parts jointly coordinated. ---- LegalRuleML ---- / / | \ \ ------------------- / | \ LegalRuleML Metadata / / | \ \ \ \ Deontic / | \ sources authors normsQualification LegalRuleML Defeasible RuleML Temporal \ \ \ | \ LegalRuleML \ jurisdiction \ | LegalRuleML/ \ \ \ | defesibility Temporal RuleML \ | / \ | LegalRuleML \ \ Argumentation \ \ \ | / \ \ Deliberation RuleML Reaction RuleML So the idea is to develop the temporal model in two directions: 1. one for the norms (e.g. efficacy, enforciability, etc.) 2. and one for the events that are subject of the norms (e.g. if X make assaults to Y for two months, X is guilty of "stalking crime", if Y belongs to X and X is a earthquake zone, then Y no tax payments till 15/5/2013). The two goals are really connected in legal domain and we need to face them together. The following example clarifies the concept. Section 25 of Terrorism Act 2006 has a natural interval of efficacy by default. This new provision coming from the Order 2010 suspend this efficacy. "Disapplication of section 25 of the Terrorism Act 2006 2. Section 25 of the Terrorism Act 2006 is disapplied for a period of six months beginning with the coming into force of this Order. " We have to manage also retroactive events and the event calculus model is not appropriate. In this case we need: a) a method for modelling the natural interval of efficacy (permanent interval of time) b) a method for modelling the modification inside of the norm c) a method for dynamically recalculate the efficacy interval and readjust the permanent interval of time Also the "jurisdiction" is an example of what we would like to do. "Jurisdiction" topic is composed by two very different aspects: - there is a natural "jurisdiction" of the act itself (e.g. Italian Constitution is by default under Italian jurisdiction, a UN resolution is word wide usually). We can for now call "sovregnity" (I don't like the term, we need to find a better term), just for distinguish it from the others meaning. This "soveregnity of the act" and it is a property of the act and it is usually quite a static attribute (EU for the directives, UN for the resolutions, etc.) - there is a "court of competent jurisdiction" of the court for the trial that need for sure a deliberative rule description because it is a content of the law (e.g. Consumer Code in EU: if X is eCommercCustumer and ((X is a resident of Y or X lives in Y) and Y is an EU country), then jurisdiction is EU). We believe that it is now time to focus on the temporal aspects of LegalRuleML. In the next TC meeting we will put these topics in the agenda. I hope this clarify the goals, the expected outcomes and the methodology of the LegalRuleML. Best regards, Monica and Guido Il 06/07/2012 00:18, Boley, Harold ha scritto:
Dear Monica, Guido, and All, Before specifying which tags belong to the lrml namespace [*], let us first have a look at the big picture. Monica created one on May 20, 2012, as a variant of Harold's earlier diagram which is oriented so that the higher layers _use_ the lower layers:About the relationship between RuleML and LegalRuleML, I would like tostart from your very nice representation: ---- LegalRuleML ---- / / | \ \ ------------------- / | \ Ontologies / / | \ Deontic RuleML Defeasible RuleML Temporal RuleML \ \ | / \ \ Deliberation RuleML Reaction RuleML I think that deontic topic needs (in legal domain) more verticalization and less neutrality and genericity, as well as the legal temporal issues. A possible refinement could be: ---- LegalRuleML ---- / / | \ \ ------------------- / | \ LegalRuleML Metadata / / | \ \ \ \ Deontic / | \ sources authors normsQualification LegalRuleML Defeasible RuleML Temporal \ \ \ | \ LegalRuleML \ jurisdiction \ | LegalRuleML/ \ \ \ | argumentation \ \ \ | / \ \ Deliberation RuleML Reaction RuleML Note that "jurisdiction", in my vision, could be expressed also with "Deliberation RuleML" when the jurisdiction is a rule (if X is citizen of Y and X is resident in Z, than jurisdiction is UE), rather than a fact (UE by law).<< In both variants, LegalRuleML is the top-level component which is: 1) layered on the foundation of Deliberation RuleML and Reaction RuleML as well as their reusable Deontic, Defeasible, and Temporal extensions; 2) cross-connected with Ontologies or very rich LegalRuleML Metadata that are supported by sources, authors, and normQualifications. The Deliberation RuleML 1.0 and Reaction RuleML 1.0 specifications as well as the specifications of Deontic, Defeasible, and Temporal RuleML need all be horizontal standards in support of, e.g., LegalRuleML plus existing & future vertical OASIS standards. The RuleML Initiative, focusing on 1), has achieved the Deliberation and Reaction RuleML foundation, and is now finishing the Defeasible RuleML extension. It has recently resumed work on Modal (including Deontic) RuleML, where requirements from LegalRuleML for the deontic logic are treated with the highest priority. Temporal RuleML should be developed from its two roots in Deliberation and Reaction RuleML, and fulfill the requirements of legal time notions. The RuleML Initiative is happy to first develop the temporal extension required for LegalRuleML, and later broaden it to other needed temporal extensions. In the remaining months of the TC, there is much work to be done on 2) and the LegalRuleML top-level component. Hence this synergetic division of labor will give us the desired OASIS LegalRuleML results and maximum impact. Best regards, Harold and Adrian -------------------------------------- [*] Overrides had been introduced for Courteous and Defeasible RuleML. @key and @keyref were introduced in Reaction RuleML. -----Original Message----- From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of monica.palmirani Sent: Monday, July 02, 2012 10:40 AM To: email@example.com Cc: Chet Ensign Subject: [legalruleml] Specifications and Namespace Dear all, we need to specify in our examples, including whose we have approved the last TC (Friday June 30th), which tags belong to the lrml namespace and which were already present in RuleML before the institution of this LegalRuleML TC. All the ideas, requirements, needs arisen in the LegalRuleML TC discussion and not present previously in RuleML or in Reaction Rule, concur to build the LegalRuleML specifications, following the IPR issue of OASIS. E.g. lrml:override lrml:key lrml:keyref (anyURI) Best regards, Monica and Guido -- =================================== Associate professor of Legal Informatics School of Law Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna C.I.R.S.F.I.D. http://www.cirsfid.unibo.it/ Palazzo Dal Monte Gaudenzi - Via Galliera, 3 I - 40121 BOLOGNA (ITALY) Tel +39 051 277217 Fax +39 051 260782 E-mail firstname.lastname@example.org ==================================== LA RICERCA C’È E SI VEDE: 5 per mille all'Università di Bologna - C.F.: 80007010376 http://www.unibo.it/5permille Questa informativa è inserita in automatico dal sistema al fine esclusivo della realizzazione dei fini istituzionali dell’ente. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
-- =================================== Associate professor of Legal Informatics School of Law Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna C.I.R.S.F.I.D. http://www.cirsfid.unibo.it/ Palazzo Dal Monte Gaudenzi - Via Galliera, 3 I - 40121 BOLOGNA (ITALY) Tel +39 051 277217 Fax +39 051 260782 E-mail email@example.com ==================================== LA RICERCA C’È E SI VEDE: 5 per mille all'Università di Bologna - C.F.: 80007010376 http://www.unibo.it/5permille Questa informativa è inserita in automatico dal sistema al fine esclusivo della realizzazione dei fini istituzionali dell’ente.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]