- From: Peter Krantz <peter.krantz@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 10:13:25 +0200
- To: "Kjetil Kjernsmo" <Kjetil.Kjernsmo@computas.com>, public-egov-ig@w3.org
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 9:48 AM, Kjetil Kjernsmo <Kjetil.Kjernsmo@computas.com> wrote: > > > However, the problem is that laws are simply not very logical. There are many > cases where you cannot say if (you do this) then (this happens). Laws are > sometimes deliberately vague, to allow for human consideration, which, I > suppose is a good thing. Absolutely. We have been trying to create a technical framework that in the first step only connects laws with each other (there are a lot of references between them) in a sound way. We did, however, anticipate that specific government authorities would like to extend our general vocabulary with things their specific domain in order to express more detailed statements. We have found a lot of stuff from the semweb area works really well here. Our main problem right now lies with the tools that are used to produce laws. We are also struggling with regulations that tell us that laws needs to be published exactly the same way as they looked when they were signed. Hence, current practice involves a lot of non-standard PDF documents. Kind regards, Peter Krantz
Received on Monday, 8 September 2008 08:14:01 UTC