[legalxml-econtracts] Thinking about information models

[Dave Marvit <dave@marvit.org>]

Folks,

John's insightful comments about the fact that there are several coexisting
information models in a given document has gotten me thinking.

It seems to me that the lens used to look at a contract determines which
information models are most significant. For someone worrying about printing
contracts (to meet various hardcopy filing demands) the physical model might
be most important. For me (thinking about automated negotiation) a
parameterized representation consisting of name value pairs becomes the most
important.

Perhaps one approach is to use the scenarios to determine not only the
appropriate constraints (no mean feat), but also to figure out what
information models are at play.

I suspect that we will end up having to represent a contract as several
coexisting documents -- each reflecting a different information model.

One early guess is that we may end up with something like this:

1. A physical model document - describing the contract in terms of
pagination and layout
2. A structural model document - describing the contract in terms of
paragraphs, clauses etc...
3. An obligation model document - describing the contract in terms of
commitments to which all parties have agreed. (I will look forward to
learning more about this perspective from Dr. Leff.)
4. A parameterized model - describing the contract in terms of the values of
each of the contract terms.
5. (Others?)

Put them all together (for some value of 'all') and you get a contract. The
specific model(s) used depends upon the demands. But to fully represent a
contract all of these different models must be created.

Thoughts?

Dave Marvit
Fujitsu
dave@marvit.org