- From: Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2016 11:44:20 +0000
- To: Thomas Francart <thomas.francart@sparna.fr>, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- Cc: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, Margaret Hagan <mdhagan@stanford.edu>, "schema.org Mailing List" <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAM1Sok1FDALMZcyRSjPkwqZQbyiWjwEbF5O_qDUS_BP_vQT_zg@mail.gmail.com>
With dan come wisdom. nonetheless i vote 'law' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law / https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q7748 "system of rules and guidelines, generally backed by governmental authority" in the interests of not having to complicate matters with similar URIs. Perhaps a vote (+1/0/-1) would be insightful? Tim.H. On Mon, 14 Nov 2016 at 22:23 Thomas Francart <thomas.francart@sparna.fr> wrote: > Hello > > > > 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 proposal adresses only law/legislation, but following this comment > <https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1156#issuecomment-223697081> > from Dan Brickley we moved it to a broader "legal.schema.org" (as far as > the proposal is concerned, it doesn't really matter) : "I'm inclined to > explore this as a foundation for something like "legal.schema.org" > covering both the description of legislation but also other aspects e.g. > case law / court documents, which @stuartrobinson > <https://github.com/stuartrobinson> and others have been looking into. > That would be consistent with what we've done for the medical/health parts > of schema.org". > > Thomas > > > 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 > > > > > -- > > *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 >
Received on Monday, 14 November 2016 11:45:07 UTC