Re: Legal issues and services extension

Margaret,

Busy day.  still preparing a response.  I think the concept of legal or
law.schema.org is the appropriate method.  I also encourage broader
participation to better identify other related areas of civics, and have a
great deal of sentiment with regard to the use-cases you've illustrated.

I've also include Manu.  Manu is a lead on a thing which has had many
labels overtime, but are perhaps better understood as 'verifiable claims'.

Per below, identifying the veracity or legitimacy of a claim contains
elements that are beyond the realms of machine-readable language whilst
still depending upon the availability of it.

Manu can provide more information about what may be required to improve the
representation of 'tested' or 'verifiable claims'.

On Mon, 14 Nov 2016 at 19:02 Thomas Francart <thomas.francart@sparna.fr>
wrote:

> Margaret
>
> 2016-11-13 18:44 GMT+01:00 Margaret Hagan <mdhagan@stanford.edu>:
>
> Hi Timothy,
>
> Yes, perhaps it should be civics, rather than legal. My only concern is
> that some legal issues aren’t about the government-to-citizen relationship
> (like civics would imply), but about family matters (divorce, child
> custody, child support, domestic violence — these are some of the most
> common-searched legal help topics), corporate matters, contracts, property,
> etc.
>
> I’ve been working with courts and legal clinics to create an initial
> classification of the types of information that need to be delivered to
> end-users, as they search for help.
>
> The information classes are in 4 main categories:
>
> 1. Legal conditions (the issues that the legal system can help you solve,
> like needs for a name change, clearing record, starting a company, getting
> a divorce, protection against an abuser, response to eviction, etc. —
> taking how people describe their problems and framing it into legal terms)
> 2. Service providers (the govt., private, non-profit, and online/DIY
> services that can help a person deal with this condition, and where they’re
> located, what their availability is, and what eligibility factors they
> require)
> 3. Legal process (the tasks, forms, deadlines, fees, and other procedural
> information to know to deal with the condition)
> 4. Legal rules/codes (the official, jurisdiction-specific statements from
> the govt. about what is allowed, what rights people have, what duties they
> have, etc.)
>
>
> For your point 4 above, please have a look at the proposed
> legal.schema.org extension :
> https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1156 and examples of how to
> describe a legislation in a legal portal using schema.org plus this
> extension at
> http://legal.eli-legislation-schemaorg.appspot.com/Legislation. Please
> contribute if you have comments or ideas.
>

As noted above; why legal rather than law?  the law of the people vs.
where's the legal department, amongst the considerations of related
considerations.

I guess also, 'legal' may relate well to 'terms' applied to websites.  yet
the actionable use of it would be subject to 'law'.


>
> The ideal is that search engines can serve jurisdiction-correct,
> official-sourced information about what a person’s problem is in legal
> terms, what the local law says about it, what steps they can take to fix
> it, and who they can reach out to for help.
>
>
> The proposed extension adresses some of these items :
>
>    - the notion of a legal document being "official" or not (a signed PDF
>    document is official, the HTML version is informative only)
>    (legislationLegalValue)
>
> MANU: FYI - perhaps this is a use-case for http-signed (W3C) formats?

>
>    -
>    - the notion of a legislation being currently in force or not ("not
>    yet" in force or "not anymore" in force, i.e. abrogated/repealed)
>    (legislationLegalForce)
>    - the applicability area of a legislation (spatialCoverage)
>    - the applicability time span of a legislation (temporalCoverage)
>    - the official service/ministry they can call for question about the
>    legislation (legislationResponsible)
>
> We want also to give the ability for search engines to serve
> "jusrisdiction-correct", "official-sourced" and currently-applicable
> legislation documents.
>
> Thomas
>
> Tim.H.

>
> The legal rules/codes schema may be covered by the wiki categories, and
> the service providers may be covered by existing schema.org.
>
> Let me know what you think! Best, Margaret
>
>
> On November 13, 2016 at 9:16:24 AM, Timothy Holborn (
> timothy.holborn@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> Hi Margaret,
>
> I have a feeling this may be better refined as civics.schema.org
>
> A few links:
> https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1337
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Civics
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Law
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Rights
> However i also understand some forms of lawPractice are far less 'civics'
> related than others.  The use-cases you've illustrated are well within the
> civics domain, i'd also add homelessness and amenities (which in-turn have
> local laws attributed, for instance),
>
> and am otherwise interested to hear your thoughts.
>
> It is very early morning here.  can respond with more info later today.
>
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2016 at 03:20 Margaret Hagan <mdhagan@stanford.edu> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I was wondering if anyone knew of an extension for legal issues, rules,
> and/or services.
>
> I work at Stanford Law & d.school, and I’ve got support to build out an
> extension for information about common legal help conditions, like
> evictions, domestic violence protection, and clearing your criminal record.
> The goal is to offer reliable information akin to the medical/health
> extension.
>
> I wanted to check if there’s anyone else who has been working on a similar
> law extension, so I’m not duplicating efforts.
>
> Thanks! Best, Margaret
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Thomas Francart* -* SPARNA*
> Web de *données* | Architecture de l'*information* | Accès aux
> *connaissances*
> blog : blog.sparna.fr, site : sparna.fr, linkedin :
> fr.linkedin.com/in/thomasfrancart
> tel :  +33 (0)6.71.11.25.97 <+33%206%2071%2011%2025%2097>, skype :
> francartthomas
>