Re: [legalruleml] Glossary Document revision

[Guido Governatori <Guido.Governatori@nicta.com.au>]

Sent from my iPad

> On 9 Mar 2014, at 1:19, Tara Athan <taraathan@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 3/7/14 11:07 PM, Guido Governatori wrote:
>>> On 8 Mar 2014, at 9:43 am, Tara Athan <taraathan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Attached are some minor changes to the Glossary document.
>>> 
>>> I have transferred all of these Node definitions into the schema and committed.
>>> 
>>> There is just one mismatch - we have no definition for the Overrides element, and a definition of OverridesStatement that probably should refer to an Overrides. Like so:
>>> 
>>> Overrides +: an indication of a defeasible priority relationship between Legal Rules.
>>> OverridesStatement +: a statement of an Overrides.
>>> This definition would read better if it was Override ( a noun) rather than Overrides ( a verb).
>>> Tara
>>> 
>> An alternative definition of Overrides could be: "an indication that a Legal Rules takes precedence over a second Legal Rule. The two Legal Rules are in a defeasible priority relationship".
> Sounds pretty good to me. Possible perturbations to the wording (in order to get rid of the dreaded word "relationship"):
> 
> an indication that a Legal Rule takes precedence over another Legal Rule. The two Legal Rules are comparable with respect to defeasible priority.

or "the pair of Legal Rules are an instance in a defeasible priority relation."

I have used "a Defeasible priority relation" because we can have contexts and times and we can have multiple of such relations.

> This language suggests that defeasible priority is an order - I'm not sure if that is always reasonable. However, I believe that in standard Defeasible Logic, defeasible priority must be a (strict partial) order.

It is not an order, in general there is no transitivity. It is just a binary relation over rules.

> These definitions confirm (for me) that the Node name should be Override. We should be able to talk about "an Override", while "an Overrides" sounds funny. I'm thinking of the grocery store ("Checker #4 needs a manager for an override ...), or as in http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/override  "an act or an instance of overriding").

I think that one of the reasons for the Overrides name was  "rule1 overrides rule2".  I think it was first proposed by Benjamin Grosof. Apart historical reasons I agree with Tara.

All the best

Guido

> Tara
>> 
>> All the best
>> 
>> Guido
>> 
>>> <Glossary-v9-corr.odt><ATT00001.txt>
>> 
>> ________________________________
>> 
>> The information in this e-mail may be confidential and subject to legal professional privilege and/or copyright. National ICT Australia Limited accepts no liability for any damage caused by this email or its attachments.
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
>> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php