officialGazette can include "act" component ?

[Naftali B.]

Dear Monica,

Dear all,

We trying to define how to include our "final" act inside the officialGazette, 

Do we need to create a new version of the act which will be publish inside the officialGazette?

The question came from the problem with "which document i refer to" when i adding new amendment inside a future document,

If i refer to the act which published in the "officialGazette" that has editorial elements such as eop, 

Or i refer to the previous step of the act without the editorial elements?  

I hope that my question is clear.

Thanks from advanced.

Naftali B. 

[Monica Palmirani]

Dear Neftali,

this kind of issues need first a URI naming convention analysis concerning your scenario.

In general you use the references at WORK level (/akn/il/act/2008-10-20/8/!main#art_20), so even if you are referring to a partition in the future the reference follows dynamically the evolution over the time and independently (usually) to the editorial tags (e.g., eop).

I need an example in order to understand better the case in detail and provide you a precise solution.

Best,
Monica

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "akomantoso-xml" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to akomantoso-xm...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/akomantoso-xml/efbb9856-833c-4f48-badf-07aa2a88741a%40googlegroups.com.

[elhanan schwarts]

Dear Monica,

I will try to explain the question:

Assume an official gazette published that contain collection of publications one of them is new act.

The xml of the official gazette can be as the following:

xml no 1

<officialGazette>

<meta>

...FRBR (new work)...

<meta/>

<cmponents>

<component>

<act>

<meta>

<FRBRWork>

<FRBRuri value="akn/il/act/2020-11-03/587"/>

 ...

</FRBRWork>

<FRBRExpression>

<FRBRuri value="akn/il/act/2020-11-03/587/he@"/>

</FRBRExpression>

<publication name="GAZETTE NOTICE" date="2020-11-03" number="Vol. CXIII - No.126" showAs="Gazette"/> 

...

Because this is a new law, a new expression of the act will be created that will serve as an infrastructure for the future consolidation

xml no 2

<act>

<meta>

<FRBRWork>

<FRBRuri value="akn/il/act/2020-11-03/587"/>

</FRBRWork>

<FRBRExpression>

<FRBRuri value="akn/il/act/2020-11-03/587/cons:he@"/>

</FRBRExpression>

...

We added the kyeword cons as prefix for mark that this is a consolidation akt.

While the first xml will contain design instructions (AKN) and indirect modification (active modification of enother acts), the second xml will not contain design instructions and will not contain any indirect modicfication, but will contain the law itself. 

In the future, when the law will be modifyed every change will create a new expression of the second xml and the modification will be marked as passive modification.

Is that so?

Many Thanks,

Elhanan

בתאריך יום חמישי, 31 באוקטובר 2019 בשעה 21:31:16 UTC+2, מאת Monica Palmirani:

Dear Neftali,

this kind of issues need first a URI naming convention analysis concerning your scenario.

In general you use the references at WORK level (/akn/il/act/2008-10-20/8/!main#art_20), so even if you are referring to a partition in the future the reference follows dynamically the evolution over the time and independently (usually) to the editorial tags (e.g., eop).

I need an example in order to understand better the case in detail and provide you a precise solution.

Best,

Monica

Il 31/10/2019 15:55, Naftali B. ha scritto:

Dear Monica,

Dear all,

We trying to define how to include our "final" act inside the officialGazette, 

Do we need to create a new version of the act which will be publish inside the officialGazette?

The question came from the problem with "which document i refer to" when i adding new amendment inside a future document,

If i refer to the act which published in the "officialGazette" that has editorial elements such as eop, 

Or i refer to the previous step of the act without the editorial elements?  

I hope that my question is clear.

Thanks from advanced.

Naftali B. 

-- 

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "akomantoso-xml" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to akoman...@googlegroups.com.

[Fabio Vitali]

Dear Elhanan,

> Because this is a new law, a new expression of the act will be created that will serve as an infrastructure for the future consolidation
> xml no 2
> <act>
> <meta>
> <FRBRWork>
> <FRBRuri value="akn/il/act/2020-11-03/587"/>
> </FRBRWork>
> <FRBRExpression>
> <FRBRuri value="akn/il/act/2020-11-03/587/cons:he@"/>
> </FRBRExpression>
> ...
> We added the kyeword cons as prefix for mark that this is a consolidation akt.

This is wrong. The resolver would not accept this URI.

The number (587 in this case) is the last item of the Work specification. The first item after that MUST be the language, and then the '@' character and then a version specification string (usually, the version date). If you want to add a meaningful string, you can, but after the '@':

> The IRI for the Expression as a whole consists of the following pieces:
> · The IRI of the corresponding Work as discussed in section 4.4
> · The character “/”
> · The human language code [...]
> · The “@” character (required)
> · Zero or more semicolon-separated version identifiers as follows:
> - If an approved act, the version date of the Expression in syntax YYYY-MM-DD. [...]
> - If any other document, the presentation date is appropriate, or the version number if one exists, or any other disambiguating string that helps identifying the specific version of the document. [...]
> · Any content-specification date (as opposed to validity dates) (optional).
> · Any content authoring information to determine the authoriality of the text content (optional).

Also: remember to start the URI with a slash. This is required. Here a few proposals:

> <FRBRuri value="/akn/il/act/2020-11-03/587/he@cons"/> // I do not like this but is correct.

> <FRBRuri value="/akn/il/act/2020-11-03/587/he@2021-07-12-cons"/> // Problematic in general and unacceptable for enacted documents
> <FRBRuri value="/akn/il/act/2020-11-03/587/he@2021-07-12/2021-07-15/cons"/> // My favorite. 2021-07-15 is the date of the generation of the consolidated content (can be the same date of the version date, but not earlier) and cons is an authoring information for readers.

regards

Fabio

--

Fabio Vitali The sage and the fool
Dept. of Informatics go to their graves
Univ. of Bologna ITALY alike in this respect:
phone: +39 051 2094872 both believe the sage to be a fool.
e-mail: fa...@cs.unibo.it Where, then, may wisdom be found?
http://vitali.web.cs.unibo.it/ Qi, "Neither Yes nor No", The codeless code

[Fabio Vitali]

Argh. I forgot I could propose an even better solution. Sorry.

<FRBRuri value="/akn/il/act/2020-11-03/587/he@2021-07-12;cons"/> // The best solution. The first item is the version date then a semicolon separates it from a different version identifier, "cons".

Ciao

Fabio

--

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "akomantoso-xml" group.

> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to akomantoso-xm...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/akomantoso-xml/B92D9B68-4995-430B-8226-2284F87D12FA%40gmail.com.

[נפתלי ביליג‎]

Dear Fabio,

your solution is fantastic, thank you, 

one question about it, for the first expression of the work, the resolver can accept such uri like this:

<FRBRuri value="/akn/il/act/2020-11-03/587/he@;cons"/>  

Thanks,

Naftali.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/akomantoso-xml/513376F6-D824-4981-A118-8637762DF2E3%40gmail.com.

--

נפתלי ביליג  - מתכנת מחשבים

052.740.1735

[Fabio Vitali]

From my point of view,

> <FRBRuri value="/akn/il/act/2020-11-03/587/he@;cons"/>

is identical to

> <FRBRuri value="/akn/il/act/2020-11-03/587/he@cons"/>

which is allowed for non-enacted documents (whatever that means), but not for enacted documents, because they have to have an enactment date.

Ciao

Fabio

--

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/akomantoso-xml/CAHiUuQhW_rt_eyhcSgFLyi%3Db76x%2BRN5V%3D0VO5kib32qknAzTag%40mail.gmail.com.