[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Constitutive rules and metarules
Dear LegalRuleML TC members, I am looking at the LegalRuleML core specification to compare some of its features to the model of constitutive rules that I recently built. I noticed that the explanation of constitutive rules is very short,
and also the examples are very few. In particular, I was not able to understand: 1-which type of information can be added as “head” of constitutive rules. I can figure out how to build legal definitions (even though the “counts as” relation is missing – small issue-, and so is the context
– bigger issue, see below) but how am I supposed to build other types of constitutive effects such as the “party to the law” statements (i.e. x is the subject of rule y) or relative necessities (x that doesn’t have the characteristic y does not count as z
in rule k)? These are mainly metarules, so I guess my question is firstly “can we express metarules in LegalRuleML”? 2- how to represent the context of constitutive rules. The “jurisdiction” tag within the “context” block is not enough, because sometimes the context of a constitutive rule does not correspond to an entire
jurisdiction: for example, most legal definitions only apply within the law that they appear in (think about Article 4 of most EU directives). How can we specify that “x counts as y in context z” where this z can be not just a jurisdiction but also a legal
document? If there is any material re constitutive rules within LegalRuleML besides the core specification, I would be grateful if you could point me there so I can investigate these issues myself.
Marcello P.S. the model of constitutive rules I am referring to:
http://www.mirelproject.eu/MIRELws@ICAIL/MIRELwsPubs/Ceci-etal-MIRELwsAtICAIL.pdf |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]