{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252 {\fonttbl\f0\ftech\fcharset0 CMSS17;\f1\ftech\fcharset0 CMSSBX10;\f2\ftech\fcharset0 CMSS10;\f3\ftech\fcharset0 CMR10;\f4\ftech\fcharset0 CMBX10;\f5\ftech\fcharset0 CMR9;\f6\ftech\fcharset0 CMTT9;\f7\ftech\fcharset0 CMTT10;\f8\ftech\fcharset0 CMTI10;\f9\ftech\fcharset0 CMR7;\f10\ftech\fcharset0 CMSY10;\f11\ftech\fcharset0 CMR6;\f12\ftech\fcharset0 CMTI9;\f13\ftech\fcharset0 CMR8;\f14\ftech\fcharset0 CMBXTI10;\f15\ftech\fcharset0 CMMI10;\f16\ftech\fcharset0 CMCSC10;\f17\ftech\fcharset0 CMSY8;}\pard\plain\ql\f0\fs20 {\fs34 MetaLex CEN Workshop Proposal\par }{\f1 Alexander Boer and Erik Hupkes\par }{\f2\fs22 University of Amsterdam\par The Netherlands\par }{\f1 Fabio Vitali and Monica Palmirani\par }{\f2\fs22 University of Bologna\par Italy\par }{\f1 Bal´azs R´atai\par }{\f2\fs22 Carneades\par Hungary\par }{\f1\fs22 Abstract. }{\f3 The partial agreement of december 2006 was adopted by the workshop in\par the understanding that it will be augmented with additional agreements on ontological\par formalization, citation and reference, time and versioning, and components and component\par inclusion. This document proposes additional agreements (taking into account proposals\par from [Palmirani et al., 2007]), and clarifies terminology.\par }{\f4 Status: }{\f3 This document is a }{\f4 draft}{\f3 . It does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the\par CEN workshop, the technical committee of the CEN workshop, or even all of its authors.\par }{\f4 MetaLex CEN Workshop\par }{\f5\fs18 tel: +31 20 525 3485\par }{\f6\fs18 http://www.metalex.eu\par http://www.cen.eu/cenorm/\par businessdomains/businessdomains/\par isss/activity/ws metalex.asp\par }{\f4 Corresponding author:\par }{\f3 Alexander Boer\par }{\f7 aboer@leibnizcenter.org}\par {\f2\fs22 CONTENTS 1\par }{\f1\fs29 Contents\par }{\f4\fs22 1 Introduction 2\par }{\f3\fs22 1.1 Namespace and Namespace Qualification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2\par }{\f4\fs22 2 Design Requirements and Principles 3\par }{\f3\fs22 2.1 Scope of the Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4\par 2.2 Separating Content and Metadata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4\par 2.3 Bibliographic Entities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5\par 2.4 Content Models instead of Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8\par }{\f4\fs22 3 Attributes and Content Models 9\par 4 Metadata 9\par }{\f3\fs22 4.1 Embedded Metadata Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10\par 4.2 OWL Schema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11\par }{\f4\fs22 5 Naming 11\par }{\f3\fs22 5.1 Uniform Resource Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12\par 5.2 Fragment Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12\par 5.3 Signalling Identification Method Conformance . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12\par 5.4 Manifestation Self-identification with Metadata . . . . . . . . . . . . 13\par 5.5 Identifying Metadata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14\par }{\f4\fs22 6 Relative URI Naming Convention 15\par }{\f3\fs22 6.1 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15\par 6.2 Absolute and relative }{\f8\fs22 mURI }{\f3\fs22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16\par 6.3 The }{\f8\fs22 mURI }{\f3\fs22 of the Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16\par 6.4 The }{\f8\fs22 mURI }{\f3\fs22 of the Expression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17\par 6.4.1 The mURI of Virtual Expressions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17\par 6.4.2 The mURI of Ex Tunc Modified Expressions . . . . . . . . . 18\par 6.5 The }{\f8\fs22 mURI }{\f3\fs22 of Work and Expression Components . . . . . . . . . . . 19\par 6.5.1 Hierarchies of components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19\par 6.6 The mURI of the Manifestation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20\par 6.6.1 The manifestation as a whole . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20\par 6.6.2 The mURI of Manifestation Components . . . . . . . . . . . 21\par 6.6.3 The URI for the components in the MetaLex/CEN package\par manifestation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21\par }{\f4\fs22 7 Addressing 22\par }{\f3\fs22 7.1 Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23\par 7.2 Citation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23\par 7.3 Component Inclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25\par }{\f4\fs22 8 Standard Conformance 25\par }{\f3\fs22 8.1 Conformance of Types and Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26\par 8.2 About Schema Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 1 Introduction 2\par }{\f1\fs29 1 Introduction\par }{\f3\fs22 The partial agreement of december 2006 was adopted by the workshop in the understanding\par that it will be augmented with additional agreements on ontological formalization,\par citation and reference, time and versioning, and components and component\par inclusion.\par The MetaLex CEN workshop requested more rigorous formalization of the four\par ontological levels (work, expression, manifestation, item) at which a bibliographic\par entity exists, and what properties belong to which level. The technical committee\par committed itself to providing a definitive list of properties of expressions that\par distinguishes version, variant, consolidation, original, translation, etc.\par This document proposes additional agreements (taking into account proposals\par from i.a. [Palmirani et al., 2007, de Maat et al., 2008]), and clarifies terminology.\par Besides submitting this consolidated agreement, the technical committee has described\par most additions and clarifications separately in:\par }{\f7 http://svn.metalex.eu/svn/MetaLexWS/documentation/2007proposal/CWA2007.pdf\par }{\f3 Intended appendices to this document are:\par 1. An XML Schema;\par 2. A DTD++ schema; and\par 3. An OWL schema.\par Check for availability of the appendices. The XML Schema and DTD++ schema are\par equivalent. Where they lead to ambiguity, it may be assumed that the DTD++ version best\par reflects the intentions of the technical committee of the workshop. The latest version of this\par document can be downloaded on:\par }{\f7 http://svn.metalex.eu/svn/MetaLexWS/documentation/2008proposal/\par }{\f3\fs22 Please regularly check for updates.\par The latest version of schema files, existing translators and schema extensions,\par and examples are always found at:\par }{\f7 http://svn.metalex.eu/svn/MetaLexWS/branches/latest/\par }{\f1\fs24 1.1 Namespace and Namespace Qualification\par }{\f4 Remark 1 }{\f8 This section is new.\par }{\f3 MetaLex/CEN elements and attributes }{\f4 must }{\f3 be namespace qualified, even though they\par may be associated to a default namespace without prefix. The namespace of MetaLex/CEN\par as adopted on YYYY-MM-DD is:\par }{\f7 http://www.metalex.eu/metalex/YYYY-MM-DD}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 2 Design Requirements and Principles 3\par }{\f3 XML elements, XML attributes, XML schema named complex types, etc, as well as OWL\par classes and OWL properties are declared in this namespace. Since ambiguity could arise in\par MetaLex/CEN specification documents as to whether a name in this namespace refers to an\par XML Schema or OWL entity, we use the }{\f8 NCName }{\f7 metalex }{\f3 for XML, and }{\f7 metalex-owl }{\f3 for\par OWL}{\f9\fs14 1}{\f3 , i.e. it assumes the existence of two namespace declarations providing two dierent\par names for the }{\f8 same namespace}{\f3 :\par }{\f7 xmlns:metalex="http://www.metalex.eu/metalex/YYYY-MM-DD"\par xmlns:metalex-owl="http://www.metalex.eu/metalex/YYYY-MM-DD"\par }{\f3 The OWL schema is published in conformance to the }{\f8 Best Practice Recipes for Publishing\par RDF Vocabularies}{\f9\fs14 2 }{\f3 guidelines as a hash namespace, recipe 3. This means that it can be\par imported with a }{\f7 HTTP GET }{\f3 request on the namespace under certain conditions.\par }{\f1\fs29 2 Design Requirements and Principles\par }{\f3 MetaLex XML positions itself as an interchange format, a lowest common denominator for\par other standards, intended not to replace jurisdiction-specific standards and vendor-specific\par formats in the publications process but to impose a standardized view on legal documents\par for the purposes of software development at the consumer side.\par The intention is to make it possible for existing XML documents, comforming to other\par XML schemas, to conform to the MetaLex basic content models by defining the used elements\par as }{\f8 implementations }{\f3 of a MetaLex content model in a schema that extends the MetaLex\par schema (see sections 2.4 and 3). The existing document does not have to be modified to\par achieve this.\par This schema extension specifies the names of elements used and allows for additional\par attributes. It is also used to further constrain the allowed content models if the schema\par extension is intended to be }{\f8 normative}{\f9\fs14 3}{\f3 .\par }{\f8 Metadata }{\f3 statements can be declared inside the XML document as RDF/A, or outside\par it as RDF if it is not desirable to modify the XML document (see section 4).\par This however entails that every XML element in a MetaLex conformant document should\par declare an }{\f4 id }{\f3 attribute to identify itself, so that it is possible to make metadata statements\par about the }{\f8 expression }{\f3 fragment embodied by the element.\par Of central importance is the standardization of identification of documents (cf. section\par 5). The MetaLex standard distinguishes identity of documents on the item, manifestation,\par expression, and work level (section 2.3), in accordance with [Saur, 1998]. Every MetaLex\par document should declare at least the URI of the document }{\f8 manifestation }{\f3 it exemplifies using\par a metadata statement (i.e. a triple with the format }{\f10 \{}{\f7 this, exemplifies, URIRef}{\f10 \}}{\f3 .\par Self-identifying metadata of the manifestation, expression, and work is supplied either\par by conformance to a }{\f8 naming convention }{\f3 (cf. section 6), or by an explicit set of identifying\par metadata (section 5.5), stored inside or outside of the document.\par The target of citations (cf. section citation) is also identified using either the naming\par convention or a set of identifying metadata. The target of citations is supplied either by\par using the }{\f4 citations }{\f3 attribute group, or by explicit metadata.\par }{\f11\fs12 1}{\f5\fs18 XML elements and types, and OWL classes and properties are already distinguished by typographic\par conventions in MetaLex/CEN. Note that OWL names only occur in MetaLex XML\par documents as the }{\f12\fs18 value }{\f5\fs18 of XML attributes.\par }{\f11\fs12 2}{\f5\fs18 http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-vocab-pub/\par }{\f11\fs12 3}{\f5\fs18 For instance if the schema is used in an editor to validate the structure of the document }{\f12\fs18 before }{\f5\fs18 it\par is published. The MetaLex schema is on the contrary intended to achieve a high degree of coverage\par of existing documents with all their imperfections}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 2 Design Requirements and Principles 4\par }{\f3 The MetaLex schema also supports compounding documents by reference (cf. section\par 7.3). The value of the }{\f4 src }{\f3 attribute is interpreted as a reference that replaces a part of\par the MetaLex manifestation stored in an external object identified by a URI. The target of\par inclusion by reference, a manifestation component, is also identified using either the naming\par convention or a set of identifying metadata.\par }{\f1\fs24 2.1 Scope of the Agreement\par }{\f4 Remark 2 }{\f8 Shortened variant of the scope statement of december 2006.\par }{\f3 The }{\f8 CEN Workshop on an Open XML Interchange Format for Legal and Legislative Resources\par (MetaLex)}{\f3 , declares, by way of its title, an interest in legal and legislative resources.\par This workshop agreement limits the applicability of the proposed XML standard to sources\par of law and references to sources of law.\par As understood by the workshop, the source of law is a writing that can be, is, was, or\par presumably will be used to back an argument concerning the existence of a constitutive or\par institutional rule in a certain legal system, or, alternatively, a writing used by a competent\par legislator to communicate the existence of a constitutive or institutional rule to a certain\par group of addressees. Because the CEN Workshop is concerned only with an XML standard,\par it chooses not to appeal to other common ingredients of definitions of law that have no\par relevant counterpart in the information dimension.\par Source of law is a familiar concept in law schools, and may be used to refer to both\par legislators (fonti delle leggi, sources des lois), legislation and case law (fonti del diritto,\par sources du droit), custom, etc. It should be noted that many romance languages make a\par distinction between the legislator as source of law, by way of speaking or writing, and the\par law as source of right(s), which is presumably what the existence of the law brings about.\par In its broadest sense, the source of law is anything that can be conceived of as the originator\par of legal rules. In the context of MetaLex it strictly refers to communication in writing, and\par in a sense covers the }{\f8 fonti del diritto }{\f3 in Italian and }{\f8 sources du droit }{\f3 in French. There are\par two main categories of source of law in writing: legislation and case law.\par The notion of a legislative resource includes legislation, and all writings produced by\par the legislator explaining and justifying legislation. The legislator is a legal person: it exists\par separately from any natural persons and organizations involved in the process of drafting\par and evaluating legislation. It is the formally correct completion of certain processes, usually\par dictated by law, that makes the legislator the formal author of a writing, and at the same\par time identifies the addressees to whom it applies. Obviously, the persons and organizations\par involved in the process of legislating may produce writings that are clearly precursors or\par legally required ingredients to the end product. These writings are also included in the\par notion of a legislative resource, but in this case it is not easy to give straightforward rules\par for deciding whether they are, or are not to be considered legislative resources. Dierent\par jurisdictions will have dierent theories on this subject.\par }{\f1\fs24 2.2 Separating Content and Metadata\par }{\f4 Remark 3 }{\f8 Shortened variant of the same section of december 2006.\par }{\f3 A guiding principle of the workshop is that identifiable structure of the document content\par is described by an XML Schema}{\f9\fs14 4 }{\f3 and DTD++ schema, while metadata conforms to the\par Resource Description Framework (RDF) }{\f9\fs14 5 }{\f3 and the associated schema language OWL}{\f9\fs14 6}{\f3 . The\par }{\f11\fs12 4}{\f6\fs18 http://www.w3.org/XML/Schema\par }{\f11\fs12 5}{\f6\fs18 http://www.w3.org/RDF/\par }{\f11\fs12 6}{\f6\fs18 http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/OWL Working Group}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 2 Design Requirements and Principles 5\par }{\f3 schema defines a number of meaning-neutral }{\f8 content models}{\f3 , i.e. algebraic expressions of\par the elements and attributes that may (or must) be found in the content of the element.\par Metadata is used to describe the meaning and context of use of the text.\par XML schema uses the same symbols - uniform resource identifiers or URI - as RDF. The\par fundamental dierence is that the URI is used in XML schema is used to attach identifiers\par to XML data structures in order for software to refer to XML data structures, and in RDF\par to }{\f8 describe }{\f3 the identified entities in a standardized format. Note that one }{\f8 could }{\f3 conceive\par of XML documents as descriptions of the document, but conventionally the XML data\par structure referred to by a document URI is a manifestation of the document, and not a\par description of it.\par The interface between metadata and the standardized XML manifestation consists of\par these shared URIs. The XML manifestation is what the URI refers to, and RDF descriptions\par describe the thing referred to by the URI.\par }{\f1\fs24 2.3 Bibliographic Entities\par }{\f4 Remark 4 }{\f8 Modified as requested by the workshop in december 2006. Glosses directly refer\par to the metadata properties in the OWL schema that classify the content of the element they\par apply to.\par }{\f3 The use of bibliographic terminology in the CEN MetaLex standard is inspired by the\par }{\f8 IFLA Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records }{\f3 (cf. [Saur, 1998]):\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 A }{\f4 bibliographic object }{\f3 is a bounded representation of a body of information, designed\par with the intent to communicate, preserved in a form independent of a sender or\par receiver. A bibliographic work, expression, manifestation, and item are bibliographic\par objects.\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 A }{\f4 bibliographic citation }{\f3 is a representation of a bibliographic identifier of a bibliographic\par object, with the intent of referring to that bibliographic object. }{\f8 Article 1}{\f3 , }{\f8 the\par first article }{\f3 and }{\f8 the previous article }{\f3 are examples of citation, and }{\f8 the Minister}{\f3 , the\par }{\f8 President of the Republic}{\f3 , }{\f8 the accused}{\f3 , and }{\f8 We, Beatrix }{\f3 are examples of references to\par other, interesting but non-bibliographic, things.\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 A }{\f4 unique bibliographic identifier }{\f3 identifies a bibliographic object uniquely. The\par }{\f8 uniform resource identifier }{\f3 is used as a unique bibliographic identifier in MetaLex.\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 A }{\f4 bibliographic work }{\f3 is a bibliographic object, realized by one or more expressions,\par and created by one or more persons in a single creative process ending in a publication\par event. A work has an author or authors, and is the result of a publication event. We\par recognize the work through individual expressions of the work, but the work itself\par exists only in the commonality of }{\f8 content }{\f3 between and among the various expressions\par of the work: it is an intentional object}{\f9\fs14 7}{\f3 .\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 An }{\f4 bibliographic expression }{\f3 is a realization of one bibliographic work in the form\par of signs, words, sentences, paragraphs, etc. by the author of that work. Physical\par form aspects, as typeface or page-layout, are generally speaking excluded from the\par expression level. Any change in }{\f8 content }{\f3 constitutes a gives rise to a new expression.\par If an expression is revised or modified, the resulting expression is considered to be\par a new expression, no matter how minor the modification may be. Expression is an\par intention object.\par }{\f11\fs12 7}{\f5\fs18 I.e. it exists only as the object of one’s thoughts and communication acts, and not as a physical\par object.}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 2 Design Requirements and Principles 6\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 A }{\f4 bibliographic manifestation }{\f3 embodies one expression of one bibliographic work.\par The boundaries between one manifestation and another are drawn on the basis of both\par content and physical form. When the production process involves changes in physical\par form the resulting product is considered a new manifestation. Thus, a specific XML\par representation, a PDF file (as generated by printing into PDF a specific Word file\par with a specific PDF distiller), a printed booklet, all represent dierent manifestations\par of the same expression of a work. Manifestation is an intention object. A MetaLex\par XML element is a bibliographic manifestation.\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 A }{\f4 bibliographic item }{\f3 exemplifies one manifestation of one expression of one work:\par a specific copy of a book on a specific shelf in a library, a file stored on a computer in\par a specific location, etc. Items stored on a computer can be easily copied to another\par location, resulting in another item, but the same manifestation. This makes adding\par metadata about the item to the item in principle impossible. On the Internet generally\par speaking only the }{\f8 uniform resource locator }{\f3 (URL) is an item-specific datum. An item\par is a physical object.\par A MetaLex XML document is a standard manifestation of a bibliographic expression of\par a source of law. Editing the MetaLex XML markup and metadata of the XML document\par changes the manifestation of an expression. Changing the marked up text changes the\par expression embodied by the manifestation. Copying an example of the MetaLex XML\par document creates a new item.\par Embedded metadata explicitly indicates its subject: if it is the document self-identifier\par (the empty string) }{\f7 "" }{\f3 or a fragment identifier }{\f7 "#f"}{\f3 composed of the document self-identifier\par and the value }{\f7 f }{\f3 of the }{\f7 id }{\f3 attribute of the intended target element, then the metadatum\par refers to the item (cf. section 3). The only item-level metadata property is however the\par }{\f7 metalex-owl:exemplifies }{\f3 property, which takes the manifestation-level identifier as value\par (cf. section 5). The required type of subject of a metadata property is explicitly constrained\par in the OWL schema by a domain restriction.\par XML attribute values by default pertain to the expression embodied by the manifestation,\par unless explicitly specified otherwise in this document.\par Each bibliographic item exemplifies exactly one manifestion that embodies exactly one\par expression that realizes exactly one work. Because all these mappings are }{\f8 functional}{\f3 , i.e.\par unambiguously maps to one entity, item identity can be, and often is, used as an indirect\par identifier of the other objects, similar to how, for instance, email addresses usually have a\par functional mapping to persons and can be used as an indirect identifier of persons. One\par can for instance refer to a work by referring to its initial expression in a context where a\par reference to a work is expected.\par The inverse of these relations is however often not a function. One can think of the work\par as an abstraction of 1+ expressions, the expression as an abstraction of 1+ manifestations,\par the manifestation as an abstraction of 1+ items. The manifestation, expression, and work\par are intentional objects whose existence is conditioned to the existence of at least one item,\par manifestation, expression, respectively. There is normally speaking no such thing as an\par expression that is not embodied, a work that is not realized, etc.\par Besides the hierarchical constitutive relationships between the four levels, there are also\par horizontal relations between the objects within a level. The expressions of a work in the\par legal field are usually either the initially published expression, or expressions derived by\par content modification activity or translation activity. Manifestations of an expression are\par either the initially created one(s), or manifestations derived by editing activity. Items of a\par manifestation are either the initially created one(s), or copies of them.\par The MetaLex OWL schema includes a number of event type definitions (cf. [Boer et al., 2004],\par and generally [Lagoze et al., 2000] on linking metadata to events) to make these horizontal}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 2 Design Requirements and Principles 7\par }{\f3 relations explicit for the expression level. At the item level they cannot be embedded in a\par MetaLex item for obvious reasons.\par Appropriate manifestation level version management methods and tools already exist\par (CVS, SVN, etc.). These are of no concern to the MetaLex CEN working group.\par Most legislative events happen at the work and expression levels. Content-related events\par like markup, metadating, and digital signature happen at the manifestation level.\par The MetaLex/CEN standard aims to provide metadata for describing both the hierarchical\par and relational way of positioning and identifying bibliographic objects, at least at the\par work and expression level, at the relevant levels of granularity.\par Some additional terminology is introduced to capture some bibliographic phenomena\par relevant to law, as well as operational criteria for recognizing these in a MetaLex XML\par document. These classifications should be considered metadata, and their specifications are\par found in the MetaLex OWL schema:\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 A }{\f4 bibliographic source of law }{\f3 is a bibliographic object that can be, is, was, or\par presumably will be referred to, by way of bibliographic citation, to back an argument\par claiming the existence of a legal rule in a certain legal system, or, alternatively, a\par bibliographic object published or realized by a competent legislator to communicate\par a legal rule to a certain group of addressees. Both the legislator and the user of\par the bibliographic source of law understand it as a medium used for communicating\par the existence of legal rules, including auxiliary declarations required for the proper\par understanding of legal rules, between legislator and user.\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 An }{\f4 initial version }{\f3 of a bibliographic work is the expression that realizes the work at\par the time of its ocial release in the public domain as a bibliographic object. It is the\par }{\f4 metalex-owl:result }{\f3 of an }{\f4 metalex-owl:InitialBibliographicCreation}{\f3 .\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 A }{\f4 version }{\f3 of a bibliographic work is either the initial version of the work, or an\par expression realized by modification of a version. It is the }{\f4 metalex-owl:result }{\f3 of a\par }{\f4 metalex-owl:BibliographicModification }{\f3 of the (}{\f4 metalex-owl:matter}{\f3 ) previous\par version.\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 A }{\f4 version in force }{\f3 of a bibliographic work is a version that is, was, or will be }{\f8 in\par force }{\f3 during a specific time interval. The in force time intervals of versions in force\par of the same work do not appear to overlap in time }{\f8 when viewed from any specific\par vantage point in time}{\f3 . Note however the possibility of }{\f8 virtual }{\f3 (section 6.4.1) and }{\f8 ex\par tunc }{\f3 (section 5.5 and 6.4.2) expressions, which may create a substantial dierence\par between vantage points in time.\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 A }{\f4 version ex tunc }{\f3 of a bibliographic work is the }{\f4 metalex-owl:result }{\f3 of a }{\f4 metalexowl:\par FictionalExpressionCreation}{\f3 , which is a temporal fiction of (}{\f4 metalex-owl:\par temporalFictionOf}{\f3 ) some other event – the constitutive event – that happened }{\f8 after\par }{\f3 the fictional event. The fictional expression creation allows rewriting institutional\par history, for instance through errata corrige, or at the occasion of an annulment of a\par modification made in the past by a constitutional court. The fictional event is treated\par }{\f8 as if }{\f3 it were a true event }{\f8 after }{\f3 the constitutive event happened. Institutional history\par therefore appears dierent depending on which vantage point in time one takes.\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 A }{\f4 consolidation }{\f3 of a bibliographic source of law is a version realized by the execution\par of legal rules found in another bibliographic source of law to the previous\par version. It is the }{\f4 metalex-owl:result }{\f3 of a }{\f4 metalex-owl:LegislativeModification\par }{\f3 of the (}{\f4 metalex-owl:matter}{\f3 ), which is the previous version, by the (}{\f4 metalexowl:\par instrument}{\f3 ), which is the other bibliographic source of law stipulating the modification.\par This is often when it enters into force, although the modification may of\par course be conditional upon some other event.}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 2 Design Requirements and Principles 8\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 A }{\f4 variant }{\f3 of a version in force of a bibliographic work is an expression that shares\par its }{\f8 in force }{\f3 time interval. Although the concept variant is often nominalized, it is a\par symmetric relationship (}{\f4 metalex-owl:variant}{\f3 ) between two expressions.\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 A }{\f4 language variant }{\f3 of an expression of a bibliographic work is an expression that\par shares its in force time interval, and diers in nothing but language. For instance, the\par English, Dutch, Italian, and German versions of a European directive are dierent language\par variants. It is also a symmetric relationship (derived on }{\f4 metalex-owl:variant}{\f3 ).\par In a MetaLex manifestation of the expression this is expressed in dierent values of\par the }{\f4 xml:lang }{\f3 attribute.\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 A }{\f4 translation }{\f3 of an expression of a bibliographic work is an expression that shares\par its in force time interval, diers in nothing but language, and has been realized\par by way of translation of one expression into another expression. Translation is an\par asymmetric relation between bibliographic expressions, expressed by a }{\f4 metalexowl:\par Translation }{\f3 event, which has a }{\f4 metalex-owl:translator}{\f3 , taking the initial\par expression as a }{\f4 metalex-owl:matter}{\f3 , and the translated document as }{\f4 metalexowl:\par result}{\f3 . The translation should not be confused with language variant: while\par language variants can be realized concurrently by the legislator, and are equally authoritive\par if they are, the translation of an expression is generally speaking less authoritive\par than the expression it is a translation of, even if }{\f8 ocially }{\f3 translated.\par }{\f1\fs24 2.4 Content Models instead of Elements\par }{\f3 A MetaLex XML element is characterized by a name, a content model, and zero or more\par attributes.\par According to the philosophy of descriptive markup (cf. the Text Encoding Initiative}{\f9\fs14 8}{\f3 ),\par the name of an XML element is usually semantically-charged (i.e. it provides a hint as to\par the meaning of the text fragment, or its role within the whole of the document). Additional\par information about the content of the element goes into attributes. The }{\f8 content model }{\f3 (cf.\par [Vitali et al., 2005]) is an algebraic expression of the elements that may (or must) be found\par in the content of the element. Generic elements, on the other hand, are named after the\par content model: they are merely a label identifying the kind of content model.\par All XML vocabularies contain a mix of descriptive and generic elements, and, depending\par on the foreseen uses of the documents, emphasize one of the approaches. For instance,\par vocabularies with precise procedural semantics (e.g. XSLT, SVG) do not depend on generic\par elements, while vocabularies intended for diverse content (for instance XHTML) employ\par generic elements. Consider for instance that in XHTML 2.0 both }{\f7 a }{\f3 and }{\f7 img }{\f3 elements are\par being replaced or phased out in favour of generic substitutes using attributes.\par The most important validation languages (e.g. XML Schema) do not allow validation\par rules to be associated to attribute values, so element names are currently the only way to\par associate validation rules to documents. This is a cause of pollution of principles, forcing\par semantically-charged elements to assume a rigid content model, while generic elements take\par care of odd situations that where not foreseen when the content models where designed.\par Legislative drafting technique has a long tradition, and often its own standards of what\par legislative documents should look like. This makes descriptive markup combined with strict\par content models very tempting. On the other hand, there are so many exceptions that can\par be found in concrete examples we sometimes just want to give up on precise description\par altogether and resort to generic elements, in particular because there should be not one }{\f8 iota\par }{\f3 of dierence between the original expression of the legislator and the XML manifestation of\par that expression.\par }{\f11\fs12 8}{\f5\fs18 http://www.tei-c.org/P4X/SG.html}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 3 Attributes and Content Models 9\par }{\f3 The approach of the workshop is to provide for a complete and automatic interchangeability\par of approaches, from generic to descriptive and vice versa.\par Sharing content models is achieved by using two special attributes, }{\f7 name }{\f3 and }{\f7 type }{\f3 that\par provide information about the meaning and the content model of the element. If one of\par these values is missing, the name of the element supplies the missing value. The following\par elements are for instance equivalent from the point of view of the standard:\par }{\f6\fs18 <clause metalex:type="metalex:container" metalex:name="clause"/>\par <clause metalex:type="metalex:container"/>\par <metalex:container metalex:type="metalex:container" metalex:name="clause"/>\par <metalex:container metalex:name="clause"/>\par }{\f1\fs29 3 Attributes and Content Models\par }{\f4\fs22 Remark 5 }{\f8\fs22 A list of relevant changes instead of a complete listing.\par }{\f3\fs22 The }{\f4\fs22 metalex:rootType }{\f3\fs22 content model, and its associated types and elements,\par disappear from the schema: instead the }{\f4\fs22 metalex:containerType }{\f3\fs22 content model\par is used. The }{\f4\fs22 metalex:containerType }{\f3\fs22 content model permits the use of an }{\f4\fs22 metalex:\par mcontainerType }{\f3\fs22 element as initial element.\par The optional metadata attribute }{\f4\fs22 metalex:showAsmust }{\f3\fs22 contain a human readable\par label of the }{\f8\fs22 whole }{\f3\fs22 metadata statement, i.e. of its subject, property and object.\par The }{\f4\fs22 metalex:src }{\f3\fs22 (URI value) attribute is used to include a component by }{\f8\fs22 reference}{\f3\fs22 .\par Attributes from any other (}{\f4\fs22 #other}{\f3\fs22 ) namespace }{\f4\fs22 may }{\f3\fs22 be used on any MetaLex\par element.\par The }{\f4\fs22 xml:lang}{\f13\fs16 9 }{\f4\fs22 must }{\f3\fs22 be recoverable from the context of the element.\par Every MetaLex element }{\f4\fs22 must }{\f3\fs22 have an }{\f4\fs22 id }{\f3\fs22 attribute. Use }{\f4\fs22 metalex:id }{\f3\fs22 if no }{\f4\fs22 id\par }{\f3\fs22 already exists.\par The }{\f4\fs22 metalex:naming }{\f3\fs22 attribute (value: a URI) is used to signal conformance to\par the section 6 naming convention for URIs. It }{\f4\fs22 must }{\f3\fs22 be recoverable from the context\par of the element.\par The }{\f4\fs22 metalex:LocalNamingConventionMethod }{\f3\fs22 (values: individual, ordinal,\par positional) and }{\f4\fs22 LocalNamingConventionScope }{\f3\fs22 (values: parent, root, or name\par of ancestor element relative to which identifiers like }{\f8\fs22 article 1 }{\f3\fs22 are unique) attributes\par are used to signal conformance to a local naming convention for structural parts of\par a document. They }{\f4\fs22 must }{\f3\fs22 be recoverable from the context of the element.\par The }{\f4\fs22 Quoted }{\f3\fs22 content models have been added: in some cases – in particular in\par modifying acts – a source of law comforming to a certain content model }{\f8\fs22 quotes }{\f3\fs22 other\par structural blocks that violate against the content model.\par }{\f1\fs29 4 Metadata\par }{\f3\fs22 MetaLex uses the conventions of RDF/A processing for embedding RDF metadata\par statements inside MetaLex XML. Consult }{\f7\fs22 http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-primer/ }{\f3\fs22 for\par }{\f11\fs12 9}{\f5\fs18 Used in conformance with }{\f6\fs18 http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/ }{\f5\fs18 and IETF RFC 3066.}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 4 Metadata 10\par }{\f3\fs22 more information about RDF and }{\f7\fs22 http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-rdfa-primer/\par }{\f3\fs22 for RDF/A. In any case of ambiguity this specification takes precedence over RDF/A\par specifications.\par The purpose of MetaLex embedded metadata is nothing more than storage of\par RDF formatted metadata in MetaLex XML. An RDF description of a resource consists\par of a set of statements. The MetaLex standard includes an OWL schema that\par specifies commonly required properties and classes in RDF statements about legal\par and legislative resources. Consult }{\f7\fs22 http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/OWL Working Group\par }{\f3\fs22 for information about OWL. This schema may be used with RDF stored outside the\par document in question, and the embedded metadata processing mechanism may be\par used with other metadata schemas like Dublin Core or PRISM.\par The main dierence between storage inside and outside the standard XML manifestation\par is the identification of the metadata author: the metadata inside the\par document is associated to the editor of the manifestation, who may be presumed to\par be the author of the metadata. An RDF statement has the following components:\par }{\f4\fs22 subject: }{\f3\fs22 the thing the statement describes;\par }{\f4\fs22 predicate: }{\f3\fs22 a specific property;\par }{\f4\fs22 object: }{\f3\fs22 the thing the statement says is the value of the property, for the thing the\par statement describes.\par The subject and the property value are always URIs. The object is either a URI\par or a (optionally datatyped) literal.\par See the RDF specifications at }{\f7\fs22 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/ }{\f3\fs22 for details\par on RDF literals and datatyping of literals.\par A MetaLex document }{\f4\fs22 must }{\f3\fs22 declare what it is a manifestation of, as follows:\par }{\f7 <meta id="m1" about="" rel="metalex-owl:exemplifies"\par href="/tv/act/2004-02-13/2/tv">\par }{\f3 Other metadata }{\f8 may }{\f3 be embedded.\par }{\f1\fs24 4.1 Embedded Metadata Processing\par }{\f4 Remark 6 }{\f8 This section is a rewrite of the corresponding section in the december 2006\par Workshop Agreement, taking into account the W3C RDF/A Working Draft of 18 October\par 2007 (}{\f14 http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-rdfa-syntax-20071018/}{\f8 ). The special subject\par resolution rules for }{\f14 meta }{\f8 have been removed, and this specification purposely restricts\par the use of RDF/A compared to the RDF/A specifications.\par }{\f3 RDF/A statements }{\f8 may }{\f3 be added to any MetaLex element if the content model allows it.\par Elements derived from the }{\f4 metalex:urMetaType }{\f3 type }{\f4 must }{\f3 contain RDF/A attributes\par expressing an RDF statement. Relative URI references in RDF/A attributes are relative to\par the }{\f8 xml base }{\f3 of the containing element.\par An RDF/A element is any XML element that contains either the attribute }{\f4 property}{\f3 ,\par }{\f4 rel}{\f3 , or }{\f4 rev}{\f3 . Exactly one RDF statement is generated per }{\f4 rel }{\f3 (relation), }{\f4 property}{\f3 , or }{\f4 rev\par }{\f3 (reverse) attribute by an RDF/A processor: the attribute indicates a new statement whose}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 5 Naming 11\par }{\f8 predicate }{\f3 is the URI value of that attribute. In the case of }{\f4 rel }{\f3 and }{\f4 property}{\f3 , the subject\par of the statement is decided by }{\f8 subject resolution}{\f3 .\par In the case of }{\f4 rel}{\f3 , the object is decided by }{\f8 URI reference object resolution}{\f3 . In the case of\par }{\f4 property}{\f3 , the object is decided by }{\f8 literal object resolution}{\f3 . In the case of }{\f4 rev}{\f3 , the subject of\par the triple is decided by }{\f8 URI reference object resolution }{\f3 and the object of the triple is decided\par by }{\f8 subject resolution}{\f3 . If both }{\f4 rel }{\f3 and }{\f4 rev }{\f3 attributes are used within the same element, two\par RDF statements are generated.\par Literal object resolution yields either the value of the }{\f4 content }{\f3 attribute or, if it is absent,\par the element content. The value of the content attribute is by default interpreted as a plain\par literal. The element content is by default interpreted as an XML literal.\par The }{\f4 datatype }{\f3 attribute is used to specify a specific XML Schema datatype\par (cf. }{\f7 http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-2/}{\f3 ). If it is present, the value yielded by literal\par object resolution is interpreted as an instance of the XML Schema datatype.\par URI reference object resolution yields either the URI value of the }{\f4 resource }{\f3 attribute\par or, if absent, the }{\f4 href }{\f3 or }{\f4 src }{\f3 attribute. The }{\f4 resource }{\f3 attribute is only used to specifically\par communicate that the URI is not intended to be “clickable”, or if a }{\f4 href }{\f3 or }{\f4 src }{\f3 attribute is\par already present on the element for other reasons and does not refer to the intended object.\par It is strongly advised to use the }{\f4 href }{\f3 attribute whenever reasonable.\par Subject resolution usually yields the URI value of the }{\f4 about }{\f3 attribute, or, if the RDFa\par element that includes the predicate attribute does not have an }{\f4 about }{\f3 attribute, the }{\f4 about\par }{\f3 attribute of the first ancestor element that has an }{\f4 about }{\f3 attribute. In the absence of an\par }{\f4 about }{\f3 attribute within scope, it yields the }{\f8 xml base }{\f3 of the element.\par }{\f1\fs24 4.2 OWL Schema\par }{\f3 The OWL schema can be found at }{\f7 http://www.metalex.eu/metalex/YYYY-MM-DD}{\f3 , where\par }{\f7 YYYY-MM-DD }{\f3 is the date of the agreement, provided that one correctly sets the mime type,\par i.e:\par }{\f7 GET http://www.metalex.eu/metalex/YYYY-MM-DD\par Accept: application/rdf+xml\par }{\f3 A description logic syntax (cf. [Horrocks and Patel-Schneider, 2003, Baader and Sattler, 2001])\par rendering is found in appendix 8.2. The OWL schema specifies the concepts mentioned in\par section 2.3, the identifying metadata specified in section 5.4 and 5.5, and the citation metadata\par specified in section 7.2, as well as some related auxiliary concepts.\par }{\f1\fs29 5 Naming\par }{\f4 Remark 7 }{\f8 This section is new.\par }{\f3 In MetaLex, bibliographic entities are identified with URIs or URI references. Identifi-\par cation of bibliographic entities plays a role in:\par 1. Self-identification of documents;\par 2. Citation of other documents;\par 3. Inclusion of document components.\par Note that URI references that are }{\f8 relative }{\f3 can resolve to dierent URIs dependent on\par XML base processing context.}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 5 Naming 12\par }{\f1\fs24 5.1 Uniform Resource Identifiers\par }{\f3 Each bibliographic }{\f8 item }{\f3 encoded in the MetaLex CEN standard }{\f4 must }{\f3 have at least one\par URI. Manifestions }{\f4 must }{\f3 refer to the item URI by the URI reference }{\f7 "" }{\f3 (i.e. the empty\par string URI reference}{\f9\fs14 10}{\f3 ). It is in principle not possible to encode item level information in\par the manifestation. It }{\f4 must }{\f3 be possible to establish the }{\f8 xml base }{\f3 of an item, in conformance\par with the XML Base specification}{\f9\fs14 11 }{\f3 and IETF RFC 3986 (or 2396). The concatenation of\par the established }{\f8 xml base }{\f3 and the }{\f4 id }{\f3 attribute of an element }{\f4 must }{\f3 result in a valid URI\par reference for the element, conformant to the addressing recommendations of W3C, which\par counts as a bibliographic identifier of the element as a bibliographic }{\f8 item}{\f3 . The are no further\par restrictions on item identification.\par Note that if one uses an explicit }{\f4 xml:base }{\f3 attribute it remains the same after copying\par the document, which means that it }{\f8 also }{\f3 behaves as a manifestation level identifier. There\par are legitimate use cases of the }{\f4 xml:base}{\f3 , where it is inserted as a temporary identifier to\par an XML subtree in an XML processing pipeline.\par The manifestation, expression, and work }{\f4 must }{\f3 also have at least one URI, which counts\par as their manifestation, expression, work level base, respectively.\par }{\f1\fs24 5.2 Fragment Identifiers\par }{\f3 Every MetaLex element }{\f4 must }{\f3 have an }{\f4 id }{\f3 attribute, not necessarily the }{\f4 metalex:id }{\f3 attribute.\par The }{\f4 id }{\f3 value of an element is a manifestation fragment identifier. Concatenated\par to the manifestation level document identifier it globally identifies the element at the manifestation\par level, concatenated to the expression level document identifier it globally identifies\par the expression embodied by the content of the element, concatenated to the work level document\par identifier it presumably globally identifies a structural element common to various\par expressions of the work.\par }{\f1\fs24 5.3 Signalling Identification Method Conformance\par }{\f3 There are two dierent methods for uncovering the relationship between manifestation,\par expression, and work, which have a direct impact on naming and addressing:\par 1. An }{\f4 explicit encoding }{\f3 of the relation between these URIs, and/or the class of the\par object designated by the URI, as metadata.\par 2. A }{\f4 naming convention }{\f3 for manifestations, expressions, and works that establishes\par a systematic relationship between transparent URIs, as proposed in the naming convention\par appendix, which allows one to derive the URI of one from the other.\par The attribute }{\f4 metalex:naming }{\f3 declares whether the manifestation respects the naming\par convention or uses some other user community naming schema. Similar to }{\f4 xml:base }{\f3 and\par }{\f4 xml:lang}{\f3 , the value of }{\f4 metalex:naming }{\f3 applies to the content of the element (usually\par the root) that carries the attribute, except when overridden by other }{\f4 metalex:naming\par }{\f3 attributes. The value of }{\f4 metalex:naming }{\f3 is a URI. The standard defines one naming\par scheme: }{\f4 metalex-owl:MetaLexNamingScheme}{\f3 , which is the proposed naming scheme\par of 6.\par The XML document metadata }{\f4 must }{\f3 declare the manifestation URI to identify itself.\par If the manifestation URI does not conform to the MetaLex naming convention it must\par }{\f11\fs12 10}{\f5\fs18 Note that URI, which is absolute, and URI reference (cf. IETF 3986), which is absolute or\par relative, and can therefore be empty, are dierent. URI are globally unique, but URI references are\par not: only after resolution to a URI they are globally unique.\par }{\f11\fs12 11}{\f5\fs18 http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 5 Naming 13\par }{\f3 declare the manifestation, expression, and work URI. In addition it must declare }{\f8 identifying\par }{\f3 metadata from which a conforming }{\f4 metalex-owl:MetaLexNamingScheme }{\f3 name can be\par constructed, being i.a. the country, document type, date of creation of the work, an optional\par sequence number on that date, language of the expression, date of creation of the expression,\par and date of creation of the manifestation. Identifying metadata is specified in section 5.5.\par For conforming documents identifying metadata can be automatically transformed into\par naming scheme conformant identifiers and vice versa.\par }{\f1\fs24 5.4 Manifestation Self-identification with Metadata\par }{\f3 Only a manifestation identifier }{\f4 must }{\f3 be declared with }{\f4 metalex-owl:exemplifies}{\f3 . The\par expression and the work must be declared in case of non-conformance to the naming convention.\par Noting that the URI reference }{\f7 about="" }{\f3 refers to the document itself, the following\par declares a standard manifestation, expression, and work base (using the naming convention):\par }{\f7 <meta id="m1" about="" rel="metalex-owl:exemplifies"\par href="/tv/act/2004-02-13/2/tv">\par <meta id="m2" about="/tv/act/2004-02-13/2/tv" rel="metalex-owl:embodies"\par href="/tv/act/2004-02-13/2">\par <meta id="m3" about="/tv/act/2004-02-13/2" rel="metalex-owl:realizes"\par href="/tv/act/2004-02-13">\par }{\f3 The RDF reading of }{\f4 m1 }{\f3 is as follows: }{\f4 m1 }{\f3 is a statement that states that the (referent\par of) }{\f7 metalex:exemplifies }{\f3 of (the referent of) }{\f7 (empty string) }{\f3 is (the referent of)\par }{\f7 /tv/act/2004-02-13/2/tv}{\f3 . An alternative, simpler form that is also permitted is the following:\par }{\f7 <meta id="m1" about="" rel="metalex-owl:exemplifies"\par href="/tv/act/2004-02-13/2/tv" />\par <meta id="m2" about="" rel="metalex-owl:thisEmbodies"\par href="/tv/act/2004-02-13/2" />\par <meta id="m3" about="" rel="metalex-owl:thisRealizes"\par href="/tv/act/2004-02-13" />\par }{\f3 The semantics of }{\f4 metalex-owl:thisEmbodies }{\f3 and }{\f4 metalex-owl:thisRealizes }{\f3 are as\par follows, assuming }{\f7 p, q, r, s }{\f3 is a set of URI references}{\f9\fs14 12}{\f3 :\par 1. If }{\f7 p metalex-owl:exemplifies q }{\f3 and }{\f7 q metalex-owl:embodies r\par }{\f3 then }{\f7 p metalex-owl:thisEmbodies r\par }{\f3 2. If }{\f7 p metalex-owl:exemplifies q }{\f3 and }{\f7 q metalex-owl:embodies r }{\f3 and\par }{\f7 r metalex-owl:realizes s }{\f3 then }{\f7 p metalex-owl:thisRealizes z}{\f3 .\par Read for }{\f7 meta }{\f3 in the examples above any appropriate element that permits metadata\par attributes. The URIs are relative, in this case conforming to the naming convention: the base\par is set by the processing environment. This means that the }{\f8 mURI }{\f3 of the naming convention\par describes a URI }{\f8 reference }{\f3 that potentially resolves to large set of URIs for each bibliographic\par object: one for each processing environment that sets its own base.\par Note that if one wants to conform to the naming convention but also want to embed\par another identifier, this is trivially achieved with a metadata statement of that impact, for\par instance:\par }{\f11\fs12 12}{\f5\fs18 This is an instance of property chaining (cf. OWL 2 specifications:\par }{\f6\fs18 http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-owl2-primer-20080411/}{\f5\fs18 )}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 5 Naming 14\par }{\f7 <meta id="m" about="/tv/act/2004-02-13/2/tv" rel="owl:sameAs"\par href="http://foo.tv/123456" />\par }{\f1\fs24 5.5 Identifying Metadata\par }{\f3 If the naming convention is not used, a set of metadata }{\f4 must }{\f3 be available, either in the\par form of RDF/A statements, or in the form of RDF. This set is based on section 6. Let\par }{\f7 <<ManifURI>> }{\f3 be the identifier of the manifestation, }{\f7 <<ExpURI>> }{\f3 be the identifier of the\par Expression, }{\f7 <<WorkURI>> }{\f3 be the identifier of the work, all declared as in the previous section.\par Datatyped values }{\f7 <xsd:date>}{\f3 , etc. are values conforming to the XML Schema datatype\par }{\f7 xsd:date}{\f3 , etc. The relevant set of metadata for the work is the following:\par }{\f7 <meta id="w1" about="<<WorkURI>>" rel="metalex-owl:resultOf"\par href="<<WorkCreationEventURI>>"/>\par <meta id="w2" about="<<WorkURI>>" property="metalex-owl:workClassID"\par content="<xsd:string>"/>\par <meta id="w3" about="<<WorkCreationEventURI>>" rel="metalex-owl:date"\par href="<<CreationEventDateURI>>"/>\par <meta id="w4" about="<<WorkCreationEventDateURI>>" property="metalex-owl:xsdDate"\par content="<xsd:date>"/>\par <meta id="w5" about="<<WorkCreationEventURI>>" rel="metalex-owl:country"\par href="<<CountryURI>>"/>\par <meta id="w6" about="<<CountryURI>>" property="metalex-owl:countryCode"\par content="<xsd:string>"/>\par <meta id="w7" about="<<WorkCreationEventURI>>" rel="metalex-owl:issue"\par href="<<IssueURI>>"/>\par <meta id="w8" about="IssueURI" property="metalex-owl:issueID"\par content="<xsd:string>"/>\par }{\f3 The main purpose of the identifying set is to create a non-ambiguous sequence of work\par creation events for each work class. Work class is identified by a descriptive string as speci-\par fied in section 6 (e.g. ”act” for act of parliament, or ”municipal;foobartown;decree”). It is\par recommended to identify work classes with specific publication channels that can be monitored.\par Work classes are specific to countries, identified by the two or three characters from\par the ISO 3166-1 standard. The combination of the date of the event and the issue number\par (some string) uniquely positions the work in the temporal sequence of works belonging to\par that work class.\par The relevant set of metadata for the expression is the following:\par }{\f7 <meta id="e1" about="<<ExpURI>>" rel="metalex-owl:resultOf"\par href="<<ExpressionCreationEventURI>>"/>\par <meta id="e2" about="<<ExpURI>>" property="metalex-owl:lang"\par content="<xsd:language>"/>\par <meta id="e3" about="<<ExpressionCreationEventURI>>" rel="metalex-owl:date"\par href="<<CreationEventDateURI>>"/>\par <meta id="e4" about="<<CreationEventDateURI>>" property="metalex-owl:xsdDate"\par content="<xsd:date>"/>\par <meta id="e5" about="<<ExpressionCreationEventURI>>" rel="metalex-owl:issue"\par href="<<IssueURI>>"/>\par <meta id="e6" about="<<IssueURI>>" property="metalex-owl:issueID"\par content="<xsd:string>"/>}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 6 Relative URI Naming Convention 15\par }{\f3 The }{\f7 <<CreationEventDateURI>> }{\f4 may }{\f3 and will often coincide with the creation of the\par work in unversioned documents. In case of an ex tunc modification (see section 6.4.2) the\par creation event is a }{\f7 FictionalExpressionCreation}{\f3 , and it is a temporal fiction of some\par other event, to be filled in, which happened at another relevant date:\par }{\f7 <meta id="e7" about="<<ExpressionCreationEventURI>>"\par rel="metalex-owl:temporalFictionOf" about="<<RealEventURI>>"/>\par <meta id="e7" about="<<RealEventURI>>" rel="metalex-owl:date"\par about="<<RealDateURI>>"/>\par <meta id="e8" about="<<RealDateURI>>" property="metalex-owl:xsdDate"\par content="<xsd:date>"/>\par }{\f3 The relevant metadatum for the manifestation is the following:\par }{\f7 <meta id="m1" about="<<ManifURI>>" property="metalex-owl:fileType"\par content="<xsd:string>"/>\par }{\f3 This metadatum }{\f4 may }{\f3 be encoded in the XML manifestation as metadata, but it is\par assumed that extraction of RDF metadata from a standard MetaLex manifestation already\par provides the information that the file type is }{\f7 xml}{\f3 .\par The OWL schema provided more more identifying metadata that }{\f4 may }{\f3 be added.\par }{\f1\fs29 6 Relative URI Naming Convention\par }{\f3 The alternative to explicit processing of the relation between the bibliographic objects the\par item represents, is depending on a systematic relationship between transparent URIs. This\par is the }{\f4 mURI }{\f3 naming convention for the construction of these transparent URIs. The URIs\par }{\f7 http://gov.tv/tv/act/2004-02-13/2 }{\f3 and }{\f7 http://gov.tv/tv/act/2004-02-13/2/tv@ }{\f3 are\par examples of its use. }{\f7 /tv@ }{\f3 adds the information, appended to the work URI, that the reference\par is to the Tuvaluan language variant, original version as published.\par Note that the naming convention is used both for self-identification and for citation. A\par self-identifying name never depends on the moment of dereferencing it: some names that\par are proper for use in citation should not be used for self-identification.\par }{\f1\fs24 6.1 Scope\par }{\f3 The scope of this naming convention is not to set a fixed way to construct URIs, but to\par define a minimal data set in the metadata (meta Unique ResourceIdentifier - }{\f8 mURI}{\f3 ). This\par }{\f8 mURI}{\f3 ) can be used as the actual URI after an XSLT/CSS transformation or a resolution\par mechanism (software) and may be managed by the author of the legal information resource\par or the editor.\par Some principles and characteristics should be respected in the naming convention:\par 1. it is a significant and logical description of the resource and not of its physical path;\par 2. it }{\f4 must }{\f3 be permanent and stable over time;\par 3. it }{\f4 must }{\f3 derive from invariant properties of the resource so as to provide some degree\par of certainty in obtaining the same name for the same resource regardless of process,\par tool and person.\par }{\f8 mURIs }{\f3 are used in numerous situations. In each case it is important to use the }{\f8 mURIs\par }{\f3 for the correct level of the document. We introduce here a few example use cases:\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 Legislative citations will usually refer to a work.}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 6 Relative URI Naming Convention 16\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 The list of attachments and schedules may vary with specific expressions, so references\par to expression components are specific for the expression level.\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 The specific manifestation that is the MetaLex/CEN XML format uses an XML-based\par syntax to refer to expression components, and associates them to the corresponding\par manifestation components containing the appropriate content. Therefore within XML\par files the URI of the manifestation components must be used to refer to attachments\par and schedules. When referring to the main document, the referring URI must contain\par the string “main” to point to the main document.\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 Multimedia fragments within an XML manifestation (e.g., a drawing, a schema, a\par map, etc.) do not exist as independent expression components, as they are only a\par part of the expression component (even when they are the only part). In fact they are\par only manifestation components, therefore referred to in }{\f4 object }{\f3 and }{\f4 img }{\f3 elements with\par the appropriate manifestation component URI. If a multimedia fragment is referred\par by two dierent manifestation components of the same manifestation or of a dierent\par manifestation/expression/work, the fragment is duplicated.\par }{\f1\fs24 6.2 Absolute and relative mURI\par }{\f3 A }{\f8 mURI }{\f3 can be absolute or relative. An absolute form of a }{\f8 mURI }{\f3 is a complete set of\par metadata that identifies a complete path for pointing out a specific resource. A relative\par form of the same }{\f8 mURI }{\f3 is a partial set of metadata that can only identify the manifestation\par itself based on a certain context. These are useful to complete several }{\f8 mURIs}{\f3 .\par In particular, we can observe two possible uses of relative }{\f8 mURI}{\f3 :\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 References at the }{\f8 work }{\f3 and }{\f8 expression }{\f3 and }{\f8 manifestation }{\f3 level need to be specified as\par relative }{\f8 mURI }{\f3 grounded on the top level.\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 References at the expression and manifestation level need to be specified as relative\par mURI grounded on the work level.\par In XML manifestations of CEN MetaLex documents, mURIs }{\f4 must }{\f3 be expressed in relative\par form, grounded at the root level of the URI.\par }{\f1\fs24 6.3 The mURI of the Work\par }{\f3 The }{\f8 mURI }{\f3 for the }{\f8 work }{\f3 is the baseline for building the }{\f8 mURI }{\f3 for the }{\f8 expression}{\f3 , which is\par the baseline for the }{\f8 mURI }{\f3 of the }{\f8 manifestation}{\f3 . The }{\f8 mURI }{\f3 for the }{\f8 work }{\f3 consists of the\par following pieces:\par 1. Country code (a two or three-letter code according to ISO 3166-1);\par 2. Type of work;\par 3. Date of release into the public domain as a bibliographically identifiable work (expressed\par in YYYY-MM-DD format, but for a type of document where the year is\par enough for unique identification the syntax is YYYY); and\par 4. Optionally an issue number representing the sequence of releases on the relevant date\par when needed for disambiguation.\par All components are separated by forward slashes (“/”) so as to exploit relative URIs in\par references. The repetition of the country code is due to the need to make the detail fragment\par independent of the domain name, so as to allow both country-specific resolution as well as\par international resolution engines.}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 6 Relative URI Naming Convention 17\par }{\f1\fs24 6.4 The mURI of the Expression\par }{\f3 Characterizing the expression is the specific identification of some content with respect to\par another content. This includes specifications of the version and the language variant of\par the expression. Therefore, dierent versions of the same work, or the same version of the\par same work expressed in dierent languages correspond to dierent expressions and will have\par dierent }{\f8 mURIs}{\f3 .\par The }{\f8 mURI }{\f3 of the }{\f8 expression }{\f3 consists of the following pieces:\par 1. The mURI of the corresponding work;\par 2. The character “/”;\par 3. The language in which the expression is drafted (two or three letter code according\par to ISO 639-1, ISO 639-2, or ISO 639-3 in that order of preference); and\par 4. A version identifier, composed of the character “@” followed by:\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 If an approved act, the version date of the expression in syntax YYYY-MM-DD,\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 If a bill, the presentation date is appropriate, or the stage in the approval process\par that the current draft is the result of,\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 If the version identifier is not followed by a date, the identifier points to the\par version in force at the moment of the resolution of the URI }{\f9\fs14 13}{\f3 , and\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 Optionally an issue number when needed for disambiguation of versions created\par on the same date}{\f9\fs14 14}{\f3 .\par }{\f3\fs22 /fr/minutes/2004-12-21/fr@ French parliamentary debate record, 21st\par December 2004, French version\par /nl/act/2004-02-13/2/en@ Dutch enacted Legislation. Act number\par 2 of 2004. English version, current\par version (as accessed today)\par /it/act/2004-02-13/2/it@2004-02-13 Italian enacted Legislation. Act\par number 2 of 2004. Italian version,\par original version\par /hu/act/2004-02-13/2/hu@2004-07-21 Hungarian enacted Legislation. Act\par number 2 of 2004. Hungarian version,\par as amended, on July 2004\par }{\f1 Table 1: }{\f3\fs22 Examples of the expression mURI.\par }{\f1\fs22 6.4.1 The mURI of Virtual Expressions\par }{\f3 In some situations it is necessary to create references or mentions of documents whose\par URI cannot be known completely reconstructed because the relevant date in uncertain (for\par instance because the exact delivery date is not known yet, the date of entry into force of\par a modifying act is not known in advance, etc). These are called virtual expressions (i.e.,\par }{\f11\fs12 13}{\f5\fs18 i.e., the “current” version of the act, where “current” refers to the moment in time in which\par the }{\f12\fs18 mURI }{\f5\fs18 is dereferenced, rather than the moment in time in which the document containing the\par URI was created\par }{\f11\fs12 14}{\f5\fs18 When dierent modifications are made on the same day: This is not uncommon on the first\par day of the year.}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 6 Relative URI Naming Convention 18\par }{\f3 references to expressions that probably do not exist yet or ever, but can be unambiguously\par deduced once all relevant information are made available).\par We must distinguish three cases in this situation:\par 1. the information is not known by the author of the expression (e.g., the legislator), in\par which case the act of actually retrieving the correct information is an act of interpretation;\par 2. the information is not known by the editor of the expression (e.g., the publisher of\par the XML version of the document), in which case the information can theoretically\par be available, but is too much of a burden for the publisher to reconstruct; or\par 3. the information is not known by the query system.\par In all these cases, the syntax for the URI of the virtual expression uses a similar syntax to\par the specification of the actual expression, but the character “:” is used instead of the “@”\par after the specification of the work URI.\par For instance, if we need to cite the expression of an act in force on date “1/1/2007”, we\par will need to refer to some expression whose date of entry in force was before 1/1/2007.\par }{\f3\fs22 /at/act/2004-02-13/2/au:2004-07-21 Austrian enacted Legislation. Act number\par 2 of 2004. German version, as amended on\par the closest date before July 21, 2004\par }{\f1 Table 2: }{\f3\fs22 Example mURI of a virtual expression.\par }{\f1\fs22 6.4.2 The mURI of Ex Tunc Modified Expressions\par }{\f3 Similar to the virtual expression, but with reference to the past, is the case of an }{\f8 ex tunc\par }{\f3 modification (errata corrige, annulment by constitutional court of a modification, etc.) of\par an already existing expression, which creates overlapping versions in the same time period.\par In these cases the character “;” and a date can be appended to the expression URI to\par represent the date at from which we are viewing. In the case of document self-identification,\par this date should be the date the relevant event that constitutes an ex tunc modification\par happened.\par Note that ex tunc modification is substantially dierent from retroactive applicability,\par which is not at issue here. It should also not be confused with the possiblity of having\par multiple issues of a work on the same day (i.e. the expression issue number).\par }{\f3\fs22 /it/act/2003-01-10/23/ita:2005-01-01;2007-12-12 Italian enacted legislation,\par act number 23 of 2003,\par Italian version, as amended\par on the closest date before\par January 1st, 2005, viewed\par on December 12, 2007, the\par date when some articles\par were anulled by court.\par }{\f1 Table 3: }{\f3\fs22 Example of the mURI of Ex tunc modified expressions.}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 6 Relative URI Naming Convention 19\par }{\f1\fs24 6.5 The mURI of Work and Expression Components\par }{\f3 If a document consists of relatively self-contained documents released together with one\par bibliographic identity, for instance appendices, annexes, tables, maps, etc., we speak of\par }{\f8 components}{\f3 .\par If expressions have identifiable components, then by extension the work may also be said\par to have components due to commonality of content between expressions. Only in few cases\par is there a dierence in component structure between the work and its expressions}{\f9\fs14 15}{\f3 .\par Some works and expressions have components, while some are only composed of a main\par document. In order to explicitly refer to individual components, it is therefore necessary\par to introduce a naming convention that identifies individual components, and still allows an\par easy connection between the component and the expression or work it belongs to.\par There are therefore two subcases.\par }{\f4 The expression or work is only composed of one component: }{\f3 In this case, the }{\f8 mURI\par }{\f3 for the work or expression as a whole and for its main component are identical.\par }{\f4 The expression is composed of many components: }{\f3 The }{\f8 mURI }{\f3 for each expression or\par work component consist in this case of the following pieces:\par 1. The mURI of the corresponding expression or work as a whole;\par 2. The character “/”; and\par 3. Either\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 A unique name for the attachment, or\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 The name “main”, which is reserved for the main document.\par }{\f1\fs22 6.5.1 Hierarchies of components\par }{\f3 Frequently, the situation occurs in which an attachment has itself further attachments. This\par creates a complex hierarchical situation in which the component should be considered, in a\par way, an expression or work itself, whose components should be listed as well and properly\par dierentiated. The process can be further iterated, in the situation in which not only an\par attachment to an expression has further attachments, but its attachments also have further\par attachments and so on. The situation must also foresee the situation in which attachments\par at dierent levels of the hierarchy end up having the same name (e.g., table A in schedule\par 1 and table A in schedule 2).\par In such cases, each component must be considered as an expression or work by itself.\par Recursively, the }{\f8 mURI }{\f3 of attachments are as follows:\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 If the attachment does not have further attachments, its }{\f8 mURI }{\f3 is provided as detailed\par in the previous section, without further addenda;\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 If the attachment has further attachments, the mURI as detailed in the previous\par section refers to the whole attachment, including its own attachments;\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 To refer to the main document of an attachment that has further attachments, a\par further “/main” part should be added; and\par }{\f10 • }{\f3 To refer to any further attachment of an attachment, a further “/” followed by a\par unique name for the attachment must be added to the attachment itself.\par }{\f11\fs12 15}{\f5\fs18 I.e. when an attachment is added or removed in a later version}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 6 Relative URI Naming Convention 20\par }{\f3 /fr/minutes/2004-12-21/fr@/main }{\f3\fs22 French parliamentary debate\par record, 21st December 2004,\par French version, main act\par }{\f3 /nl/act/2004-02-13/2/en@/main/annex1 }{\f3\fs22 Dutch enacted legislation,\par Act number 2 of 2004-02-12, in\par English, current version (as\par accessed today), annex1 to the\par main document\par (as accessed today)\par }{\f3 /it/act/2004/2/it@/main/annex1/table3 }{\f3\fs22 Italian enacted legislation,\par act number 2 of 2004, Italian\par current version, table3\par of the annex1 of the main\par document\par }{\f3 /hu/act/2004-02-13/2/hu@2004-07-21/main/map4 }{\f3\fs22 Hungarian enacted Legislation.\par Act number 2 of 2004-02-13.\par Hungarian version, as amended\par on July 2004, map 4 of the\par main document\par }{\f3 /hu/act/2004-02-13/2/main/map4 }{\f3\fs22 Hungarian enacted Legislation.\par Act number 2 of 2004-02-13.\par commonly found map 4 of\par main document\par }{\f1 Table 4: }{\f3\fs22 Some examples of the use of component mURI.\par }{\f1\fs24 6.6 The mURI of the Manifestation\par }{\f3 Characterizing the manifestation is the specific process that generated an electronic document\par in some specific format(s). This includes specifications of the data format. Therefore,\par dierent manifestations of the same expression generated using dierent data formats correspond\par to dierent manifestations and will have dierent }{\f8 mURIs}{\f3 .\par Manifestations are organized in components (the manifestation components), and therefore\par we need to identify separately the manifestation as a whole as well as the individual\par }{\f8 mURIs }{\f3 for each manifestation component. All of them are all immediately derived from the\par baseline, which is the }{\f8 mURI }{\f3 for the }{\f8 expression}{\f3 .\par }{\f1\fs22 6.6.1 The manifestation as a whole\par }{\f3 The }{\f8 mURI }{\f3 for the manifestation as a whole consists of the following pieces:\par 1. The }{\f8 mURI }{\f3 of the corresponding }{\f8 expression }{\f3 as a whole;\par 2. The character “.”;\par 3. A unique three letter acronym of the data format in which the manifestation is drafted,\par the acronym can be “pdf” for PDF, “doc” for MS Word, or “xml” for the XML\par manifestation; and\par 4. The pck for the package of all documents including XML version of the main document(\par s) according to the MetaLex/CEN rules.}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 6 Relative URI Naming Convention 21\par }{\f3\fs22 /fr/minutes/2004-12-21/fr@.doc Word version of the France\par parliamentary debate record, 21st\par December 2004, French version\par /en/act/2004-02-13/2/en@.pdf PDF version of English enacted.\par Legislation Act number 2 of 2004.\par English version, current version (as\par accessed today)\par /it/act/2004-02-13/2/it@2004-07-21.pck Package of all documents including\par XML versions of the Italian enacted\par Legislation. Act number 2 of 2004.\par Italian version, as amended in July\par 2004\par }{\f1 Table 5: }{\f3\fs22 Some examples of manifestation mURI.\par }{\f1\fs22 6.6.2 The mURI of Manifestation Components\par }{\f3 Each manifestation component is an independent electronic structure (e.g., a file) in a single\par data format. Every type of manifestation has of course a dierent data structure and file\par structure. Therefore the actual format of the }{\f8 mURIs }{\f3 of the components of the manifestation\par depends on the data format and cannot be formalized in general. In this section we therefore\par provide a grammar but not an exhaustive list of formats, that depends on the data format\par chosen for the manifestation. The }{\f8 mURI }{\f3 for each manifestation component consists of the\par following pieces:\par 1. The mURI of the corresponding expression as a whole;\par 2. The character “/”;\par 3. Some unique identification of the manifestation component with respect either to\par the manifestation as a whole or to the expression component the component is the\par manifestation of;\par 4. The character “.”; and\par 5. A unique extension of the data format in which the manifestation is drafted, for\par instance }{\f7 pdf }{\f3 for PDF, }{\f7 doc }{\f3 for MS Word, }{\f7 xml }{\f3 for XML documents, }{\f7 tif }{\f3 for TIFF\par image format, etc.\par In the next section we will examine the format of the package and the relevant URIs for a\par specific manifestation of MetaLex/CEN documents, the XML format.\par }{\f1\fs22 6.6.3 The URI for the components in the MetaLex/CEN package manifestation\par }{\f3 The MetaLex/CEN XML manifestation is a very specific manifestation using a number of\par data formats (mainly XML but could include other multimedia formats as needed) with a\par very specific organization of parts and components. Since it makes explicit choices in terms\par of data formats and reciprocal references, it is important to provide clear and non-ambiguous\par rules as to the internal naming mechanism and its overall structure.\par A MetaLex/CEN XML manifestation is a package composed of one or more files organized\par in a flat fashion. The transportable format is a ZIP file whose extension is }{\f4 .pck}{\f3 .\par Other formats are possible and acceptable as long as they adhere to these rules.\par The following are alternative options for the MetaLex/CEN package:}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 7 Addressing 22\par }{\f3 1. If the document is just composed of text and does not refer to any multimedia fragment\par of any form, then the ZIP package contains a single document called “main.xml”;\par 2. If the document is composed of many manifestation components but does not refer to\par any multimedia fragment of any form, then the zip package is composed of many XML\par files, }{\f4 one for each expression component}{\f3 ; Each manifestation component is then\par called the same as its corresponding expression component, plus the }{\f7 .xml }{\f3 extension;\par The name “main” is reserved for the main component; Numbers are never used;\par 3. If the document contains multimedia fragments of any kind, then each individual fragment\par does not have a corresponding expression component, but is just a manifestation\par component referred to in the }{\f7 img }{\f3 or }{\f7 object }{\f3 element; All multimedia components must\par be stored within an inner structure (e.g., a folder) called }{\f7 media/}{\f3 ; Multimedia components\par can be called freely, but must use the appropriate extension to refer to their\par content type; Thus a logo can be called }{\f4 logo.tif }{\f3 or any other name, as long as the\par extension is correctly specifying the content type.\par Reciprocal references to manifestation components are necessary within a specific manifestation.\par For instance, the manifestation of the main document refers to the manifestations\par of its attachments via the }{\f7 attachment }{\f3 elements, and the schedule showing an image refers\par to the file of the image via the }{\f7 img }{\f3 element. In these cases, all references }{\f4 must }{\f3 be relative\par to the package (i.e., the manifestation as a whole).\par }{\f3\fs22 attachment01.xml Manifestation of the first attachment\par schedule03.xml Manifestation of the third attachment\par media/logo.tif Manifestation of an image within the document\par }{\f3 References to manifestation components are rarely, if ever, needed outside of the manifestation\par themselves. But if needed, they will refer to the file as follows:\par 1. The }{\f8 mURI }{\f3 of the corresponding expression as a whole;\par 2. The character “/”; and\par 3. The relative reference to the required manifestation component as specified above.\par }{\f1\fs29 7 Addressing\par }{\f4 Remark 8 }{\f8 Section is new.\par }{\f3 References to URI are usually made with the }{\f4 href }{\f3 or }{\f4 src }{\f3 attribute. Because the href and\par src attributes are also RDF/A attributes the referring element also encodes a metadatum if\par an }{\f4 about }{\f3 and }{\f4 rel }{\f3 attribute are present.\par The MetaLex standard distinguishes three forms of addressing:\par 1. Reference to external objects (agents, events, etc): these are always encoded as metadata,\par and if embedded, always using the }{\f4 href }{\f3 or }{\f4 resource }{\f3 attribute.\par 2. Citation of other biliographic objects: this can be achieved through the citations\par attribute group, or through metadata, always using the }{\f4 href }{\f3 attribute. The target\par should either be identified by use of the naming convention, or by identifying metadata.\par In some cases the citation can be embedded in both attribute form and embedded\par metadata, because of the double interpretation of }{\f4 href}{\f3 .\par 3. Component inclusion: this can be achieved through the }{\f4 src }{\f3 attribute and either conformance\par to the naming convention, or additional metadata.}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 7 Addressing 23\par }{\f3 The distinguishing property of references is that the (}{\f4 rel}{\f3 ) value is a subproperty of\par }{\f4 metalex-owl:refersTo}{\f3 . Citation uses a property value that is a subproperty of }{\f4 metalex:\par cites}{\f3 , which is itself a subproperty of }{\f4 metalex-owl:refersTo}{\f3 .\par This means that the fact that some MetaLex XML element refers to another entity can\par also be stored in RDF, external to the MetaLex XML document.\par }{\f1\fs24 7.1 Reference\par }{\f3 A reference is something that refers to or designates something else, or acts as a standin for\par a relation between two things: the }{\f8 referrer }{\f3 and the }{\f8 referent}{\f3 . Since a relation can also be\par identified, the generic form of a reference is }{\f8 (referrer, predicate, referent)}{\f3 , where predicate\par is the name of the relation, and are represented as RDF or RDF/A.\par In the sense intended here a reference is an XML element (directly or indirectly) containing\par text, and the text refers deemed to refer to something else. The XML element will\par typically be of the }{\f4 inline }{\f3 content model type. A }{\f4 citation }{\f3 is an expression that refers to\par something intralinguistic, i.e. to another XML element (directly or indirectly) containing\par text, or to the bibliograpgic objects directly or indirectly embodied by it. Other references\par refer to something extralinguistic, i.e. something other than text, recoverable from the\par context in which the document was produced.\par }{\f8 Article 1, the first article }{\f3 and }{\f8 the previous article }{\f3 are examples of citation, and }{\f8 the\par Minister, the President of the Republic, the accused}{\f3 , and }{\f8 We, Beatrix, etc. }{\f3 are examples of\par relevant references to other things.\par A similar distinction, that should be distinguished from the previous one, is the distinction\par between exophora and endophora in linguistics. Take the following sentences:\par 1. }{\f8 Theft }{\f3 is the unlawful taking of a good wholly or partially belonging to another.\par 2. }{\f8 It }{\f3 (}{\f8 The theft}{\f3 ) must have been done with the intent to appropriate.\par }{\f8 It }{\f3 (or }{\f8 The theft}{\f3 ) obviously refers back to Theft in the previous sentence. It is an\par endophoric proform expression, as opposed to exophoric (That must have been done intentionally,\par pointing to an act of taking in progress). Exophoric proform expressions are\par obviously rare in legal resources.\par There is however a dierence between the reference }{\f8 It }{\f3 referring to theft as defined in\par the previous sentence and }{\f8 the previous sentence }{\f3 as referring to a sentence. Theft and it are\par coreferents of something other than text: it is not an intralinguistic reference. Expressions\par like it do stand in for another expression (Theft), but only to indirectly reference meaning\par recoverable from context. They are used to avoid repetitive expressions and in quantification\par (i.e. carrying a variable from one sentence into the next one).\par The following is an example of a reference metadatum in RDF/A:\par }{\f7 <meta about="#x" rel="metalex-owl:refersTo"\par href="http://gov.tv/act/2004-02-13/concepts#theft">\par }{\f3 The use of references is optional. The }{\f4 src }{\f3 attribute }{\f4 may not }{\f3 be used.\par }{\f1\fs24 7.2 Citation\par }{\f3 A reference with a single target (e.g. }{\f8 article 1 of the Income Tax Law or article 15.3 }{\f3 ) is\par easy to mark up. The entire referring text can be marked, and it should be linked to the\par one concept that is being referred to. This can be either a work or an expression, depending\par on whether or not version information is specified or hinted at.}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 7 Addressing 24\par }{\f3 A citation in legislation normally refers to a work. A reference to legislation in a court\par verdict necessarily refers to an expression. References in other documents can refer to any\par level.\par References with multiple targets are more complex to mark, as we now have several\par concepts to link to (i.e. }{\f8 article 5 and 6 of the Income Tax Law}{\f3 ). An important problem\par is where to anchor these links. In addition there are references to ranges, such as }{\f8 articles\par 5-10 of the Income Tax Law}{\f3 . This reference will have several targets, and without studying\par the target document we cannot determine the exact target locations. It might be }{\f8 article 5,\par article 6, article 7, article 8, article 9, article 10 }{\f3 or }{\f8 article 5, article 6, article 7, article\par 7a, article 7b, article 8, article 10 }{\f3 or even }{\f8 article 5, article 10}{\f3 . The exact targets cannot\par be included in the document, as they cannot be derived from the information present. In\par addition, the targets may change depending on the version being referred to in case of\par references to works.\par Ranges get even more complex when exceptions are involved, such as }{\f8 articles 5-10 with\par the exception of article 9}{\f3 . An interesting variation occurs when an exception is made to\par something other than a range: }{\f8 article 5 with the exception of the first member}{\f3 . This implicitely\par turns article 5 into a range of }{\f8 member 1, [..] member n}{\f3 .\par A final format for references is the “each time”: }{\f8 articles 10, 12, 15 and 16, each time\par the first member}{\f3 . First member by itself cannot be a reference to something here. The links\par }{\f4 may not }{\f3 be to the articles but to the first member of each article.\par The advantage of special markup for exception and each time constructs is that it is a\par hint to (less refined) parsers that discover and markup references that this one has already\par been discovered, interpreted, and discarded.\par Each of these complications show the same pattern: there is a dierence between the\par entities explicitly cited in the text, and the ones it refers to. In some cases an element must\par be explicitly cited to convey the information that it is }{\f8 not }{\f3 being referred to!\par Complex references create two problems for the MetaLex standard:\par 1. There are multiple reasonable ways to mark up the same statement. Some XML\par standards for instance uses to start and end range attributes on an element enclosing\par both start and end of the range. Other standards have two separate elements marking\par the start and end, each usign the same href (or similar) attribute.\par 2. The encoding of a metadata about a complex reference will necessarily require more\par than one metadata statement, and therefore need more than one carrier element if\par RDF/A is used. This is a problem if the aim is to declare existing XML documents\par as MetaLex compliant documents without adding new XML elements.\par There are two methods for describing references. The following is an example of a\par citation }{\f8 metadatum }{\f3 in RDF/A:\par }{\f7 <meta about="#x" rel="metalex-owl:cites"\par href="http://gov.tv/tv/act/2004-02-13/2/tv#x">\par }{\f3 Other available properties (}{\f7 metalex-owl:citeFrom, metalex-owl:citeUpto,\par metalex-owl:excluding, metalex-owl:excludeFrom, metalex-owl:excludeUpto}{\f3 ) can be\par used for complex references if the information is stored in RDF or if RDF/A is strongly preferred\par and modifying the XML document is no problem. The }{\f4 href }{\f3 attribute }{\f4 must }{\f3 be used.\par Alternatively the }{\f4 metalex:citations attribute group }{\f3 can be used, if adding elements\par to the original XML file is a problem but embedding the references inside the document\par is nevertheless strongly preferred, with the attributes }{\f7 metalex:href, metalex:upto,\par metalex:exclude, metalex:excludeTo }{\f3 to specify two types of ranges from }{\f7 metalex:href\par }{\f3 to }{\f7 metalex:upTo}{\f3 , and from }{\f7 metalex:excludes }{\f3 to }{\f7 metalex:excludesTo}{\f3 .\par If the naming convention is not used, the target of the citation must be identified in\par accordance with the principles set down in section 5.5. The use of citations is optional.}\par {\f2\fs22 Section 8 Standard Conformance 25\par }{\f1\fs24 7.3 Component Inclusion\par }{\f3 Some XML manifestations may include components by }{\f8 reference }{\f3 instead of by physical\par inclusion as a fragment, i.e. the inclusion reference replaces a part of the MetaLex manifestation\par stored in an external object identified by a URI. Section 6 provides some additional\par information.\par Any part, except the top level container, of a standard metalex XML manifestation can\par be implemented as a inclusion reference to an external object. On the manifestation level\par you make choices about, for instance, object names and media formats (ti, jpeg, pdf, etc.).\par In some cases a text that is (or could be) embodied by a metalex manifestation (a chinese\par appendix of a treaty) is embodied alternatively by a media object.\par For this the }{\f4 metalex:srcatt attribute group }{\f3 is provided, which defines the }{\f4 metalex:\par src }{\f3 attribute. Presence of the src attribute includes a component of the MetaLex\par manifestation stored in an external object identified by the URI that is the value of the src\par attribute.\par While not technically necessary, the existence of components can also be easily describes\par in the form of RDF/A metadata simply by adding the property }{\f4 metalex-owl:component\par }{\f3 in the }{\f4 rel }{\f3 attribute. The following is an example of a component inclusion metadatum in\par RDF/A, superimposed on the }{\f4 metalex:src }{\f3 attribute:\par }{\f7 <meta id="x" about="#x" rel="metalex-owl:component"\par metalex:src="http://gov.tv/tv/act/2004-02-13/2/tv@/table1">\par }{\f3 If the naming convention is not used, the target of the inclusion must be identified in\par accordance with the principles set down in section 5.5. The }{\f4 metalex:src }{\f3 attribute }{\f4 must\par }{\f3 be used if the }{\f8 metalex-owl:component }{\f3 property is used.\par }{\f1\fs29 8 Standard Conformance\par }{\f4 Remark 9 }{\f8 Tranformation conformance is a new notion.\par }{\f3 Conformance of XML documents to the MetaLex standard means:\par 1. validation of XML documents against a schema that restricts the MetaLex XML\par schema,\par 2. the theoretical possibility of obtaining an XML document that uses solely MetaLex\par generic elements and validates against the MetaLex XML schema by way of simple\par substitution,\par 3. use of either the naming convention or the availability of sucient metadata to construct\par names in conformance to the naming convention, and\par 4. conformance to the MetaLex CEN Workshop Agreement written guidelines.\par Any XML encoding is }{\f8 transformation conformant }{\f3 if instances can be transformed automatically\par into conformant MetaLex XML documents. The workshop recommends implementing\par the transformation in the form of an XSL transformation (XSLT}{\f9\fs14 16}{\f3 ). The workshop\par also recommends copying any attributes from the original XML encoding into the MetaLex\par XML document.\par No additional conformance criteria exist for the OWL Schema. The workshop strongly\par recommends using or subclassing MetaLex OWL Schema classes and properties wherever\par reasonable.\par }{\f11\fs12 16}{\f5\fs18 See }{\f6\fs18 http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt}\par {\f2\fs22 REFERENCES 26\par }{\f1\fs24 8.1 Conformance of Types and Elements\par }{\f3 A schema that restricts the MetaLex XML Schema declares only MetaLex conformant elements.\par The process of declaring an element is subject to the following guidelines:\par 1. You }{\f4 must }{\f3 use one of the abstract content models for the element;\par 2. You }{\f4 may }{\f3 define a restriction of the corresponding concrete type;\par 3. You }{\f4 may not }{\f3 define an extension to the content model of a concrete type;\par 4. You }{\f4 may }{\f3 define an extension of a concrete type for the purpose of adding attributes;\par 5. You }{\f4 must }{\f3 define the elements as a substitution group of one of the abstract elements\par and you must identify a type which is either one of the provided concrete types, or\par the restriction of the content model or extension of attributes of a concrete type that\par you have defined.\par To define an element conforming to the standard that can be used in XML manifestations\par of sources of law, define a non-abstract complex type, and create an element belonging to\par the substitution group of one of the abstract elements according to the subtype specified,\par for instance:\par }{\f6\fs18 <xsd:element name="article" substitutionGroup="e:abs-hcontainer"\par type="Tarticle" />\par }{\f1\fs24 8.2 About Schema Validation\par }{\f4\fs22 Remark 10 }{\f8\fs22 A technical issue uncovered by experiences in the Estrella project that\par severely restricts the usability of the content models as a basis for restrictions.\par }{\f3\fs22 The schema to be validated against is made available as a DTD++ schema and an\par XML Schema. Patterns of the form }{\f7\fs22 a* }{\f3\fs22 (zero or more }{\f7\fs22 a}{\f3\fs22 ’s) and }{\f7\fs22 a+ }{\f3\fs22 (one or more }{\f7\fs22 a}{\f3\fs22 ’s) in\par the XML schema are replaced by the pattern }{\f7\fs22 a*|a,a*|a,a,a*|a,a,a,a*|a,a,a,a,a*}{\f3\fs22 ,\par respectively }{\f7\fs22 a+|a,a+|a,a,a+|a,a,a,a+|a,a,a,a,a+ }{\f3\fs22 to align the semantics of the\par DTD++ schema and the XML Schema, at least for up to 5, or any other appropriately\par large number, to the discretion of the technical committee, to allow dierent\par restrictions of }{\f7\fs22 a }{\f3\fs22 in derived conformant content models. In XML schema, if }{\f7\fs22 b }{\f3\fs22 and\par }{\f7\fs22 c }{\f3\fs22 are restrictions of }{\f7\fs22 a}{\f3\fs22 , the pattern }{\f7\fs22 b,c }{\f3\fs22 is not accepted as a restriction of }{\f7\fs22 a+ }{\f3\fs22 or }{\f7\fs22 a*}{\f3\fs22 :\par the intended reading of the technical committee is that it should be.\par }{\f1\fs29 References\par }{\f3\fs22 [Baader and Sattler, 2001] Baader, F. and Sattler, U. (2001). An Overview of\par Tableau Algorithms for Description Logics. }{\f8\fs22 Studia Logica}{\f3\fs22 , 69:5–40.\par [Boer et al., 2004] Boer, A., Winkels, R., and van Engers, T. (2004). A content\par management system based on an event-based model of version management information\par in legislation’. In Gordon, T., editor, }{\f8\fs22 Legal Knowledge and Information\par Systems - Jurix 2004: The Seventeenth Annual Conference Amsterdam}{\f3\fs22 , pages\par 19–28. IOS Press.}\par {\f2\fs22 REFERENCES 27\par }{\f3\fs22 [de Maat et al., 2008] de Maat, E., van de Ven, S., Palmirani, M., Cervone, L.,\par Benigni, F., M´acs´ar, K., K¨or¨osi, G., and Strausz, G. (2008). (extended) tools for\par translating existing other formats into new format - deliverable 3.3, estrella.\par [Horrocks and Patel-Schneider, 2003] Horrocks, I. and Patel-Schneider, P. (2003).\par Reducing OWL entailment to description logic satisfiability. In }{\f8\fs22 Proc. of the 2nd\par International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC)}{\f3\fs22 .\par [Lagoze et al., 2000] Lagoze, C., Hunter, J., and Brickley, D. (2000). An eventaware\par model for metadata interoperability. In }{\f8\fs22 ECDL 2000 - Lisbon, September\par 2000}{\f3\fs22 .\par [Palmirani et al., 2007] Palmirani, M., Sartor, G., Rubino, R., Boer, A., de Maat,\par E., Vitali, F., and Francesconi, E. (2007). Guidelines for applying the new format.\par Deliverable 3.2, Estrella.\par [Saur, 1998] Saur, K. G. (1998). Functional requirements for bibliographic records.\par }{\f8\fs22 UBCIM Publications - IFLA Section on Cataloguing}{\f3\fs22 , 19.\par [Vitali et al., 2005] Vitali, F., Iorio, A. D., , and Gubellini, D. (2005). Design patterns\par for document substructures. In }{\f8\fs22 Extreme Markup 2005 Conference. Montreal,\par 1-5 August 2005}{\f3\fs22 .}\par {\f2\fs22 REFERENCES 28\par }{\f1\fs29 Appendix: OWL Schema Axioms}\par {\f2\fs22 REFERENCES 29\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 result}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Result\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 realizes}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicWork\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 exemplifies}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicManifestation\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 embodies}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicExpression\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 patient}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Patient\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 instrument}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Instrument\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 cites}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 CitableBibliographicObject\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 recipient}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Recipient\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 records}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicObject\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 part}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicObject\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 variant}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicExpression\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 date}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Date\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 participant}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 EventParticipant\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 thisRealizes}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicWork\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 thisEmbodies}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicExpression\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 temporalFictionOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Event\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 agent}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Action\par }{\f10\fs22 > v  }{\f3\fs22 1}{\f2\fs22 workTypeID}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f10\fs22 >\par > v  }{\f3\fs22 1}{\f2\fs22 languageCode}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f10\fs22 >\par > v  }{\f3\fs22 1}{\f2\fs22 countryCode}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f10\fs22 >\par > v  }{\f3\fs22 1}{\f2\fs22 manifestationTypeID}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f10\fs22 >\par > v  }{\f3\fs22 1}{\f2\fs22 xsdDate}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f10\fs22 >\par > v  }{\f3\fs22 1}{\f2\fs22 issueID}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f10\fs22 >\par > v 8}{\f2\fs22 result}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Event\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 realizes}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicExpression\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 exemplifies}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicItem\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 embodies}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicManifestation\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 patient}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Event\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 instrument}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Event\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 cites}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicCitation\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 recipient}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Event\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 records}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicObject\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 part}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicObject\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 represents}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicObject\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 variant}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicExpression\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 date}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Event\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 participant}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Event\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 thisRealizes}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicItem\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 refersTo}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicReference\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 thisEmbodies}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicItem\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 temporalFictionOf}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 FictionalExpressionCreation\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 agent}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Event\par Country }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 countryCode}{\f15\fs22 .null\par }{\f16\fs22 Author }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 agentOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicCreation\par BibliographicModification }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 matter}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicObject\par Editor }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 agentOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Edit}\par {\f2\fs22 REFERENCES 30\par }{\f16\fs22 EventParticipant }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 participantOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Event\par BibliographicManifestation }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 exemplifiedBy}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicItem\par BibliographicManifestation }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 embodies}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicExpression\par Matter }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 matterOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicModification\par Patient }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 patientOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Event\par Legislation }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 result}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicSourceOfLaw\par Addressee }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 recipientOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Legislation\par BibliographicExpression }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 embodiedBy}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicManifestation\par BibliographicExpression }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 realizes}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicWork\par LegislativeCompetenceGround }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 legislativeCompetenceGroundOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Legislation\par WorkType }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 workTypeID}{\f15\fs22 .null\par }{\f16\fs22 Legislator }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 agentOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Legislation\par BibliographicItem }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 exemplifies}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicManifestation\par BibliographicCitation }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 represents}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicIdentifier\par BibliographicCitation }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 cites}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 CitableBibliographicObject\par Edit }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 matter}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicManifestation\par Edit }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 result}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicManifestation\par BibliographicCreation }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 result}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicObject\par Recipient }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 recipientOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Event\par Instrument }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 instrumentOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Event\par ManifestationType }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 manifestationTypeID}{\f15\fs22 .null\par }{\f16\fs22 WorkCreationDate }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 dateOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicWorkCreation\par Copy }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 result}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicItem\par Copy }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 matter}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicItem\par Event }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 date}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Date\par Translator }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 agentOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Translation\par BibliographicObject }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 resultOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicCreation\par BibliographicWorkCreation }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 result}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicWork\par Language }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 languageCode}{\f15\fs22 .null\par }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicReference }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 refersTo}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Thing\par Agent }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 agentOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Action\par Date }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 xsdDate}{\f15\fs22 .null\par }{\f16\fs22 Date }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 dateOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Event\par Issue }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 issueID}{\f15\fs22 .null\par }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicWork }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 resultOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicWorkCreation\par BibliographicWork }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 realizedBy}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicExpression\par Result }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 resultOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Event\par BibliographicSourceOfLaw }{\f10\fs22  9}{\f2\fs22 resultOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Legislation\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 workTypeID}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 WorkType\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 languageCode}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Language\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 countryCode}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Country\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 manifestationTypeID}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 ManifestationType\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 xsdDate}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Date\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 issueID}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Issue\par }{\f2\fs22 legislativeCompetenceGroundOf }{\f10\fs22  }{\f2\fs22 legislativeCompetenceGround}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1\par }{\f2\fs22 resultOf }{\f10\fs22  }{\f2\fs22 result}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1}\par {\f2\fs22 REFERENCES 31\par embodiedBy }{\f10\fs22  }{\f2\fs22 embodies}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1\par }{\f2\fs22 instrumentOf }{\f10\fs22  }{\f2\fs22 instrument}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1\par }{\f2\fs22 agentOf }{\f10\fs22  }{\f2\fs22 agent}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1\par }{\f2\fs22 recordedBy }{\f10\fs22  }{\f2\fs22 records}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1\par }{\f2\fs22 exemplifiedBy }{\f10\fs22  }{\f2\fs22 exemplifies}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1\par }{\f2\fs22 patientOf }{\f10\fs22  }{\f2\fs22 patient}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1\par }{\f2\fs22 realizedBy }{\f10\fs22  }{\f2\fs22 realizes}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1\par }{\f2\fs22 matterOf }{\f10\fs22  }{\f2\fs22 matter}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1\par }{\f2\fs22 recipientOf }{\f10\fs22  }{\f2\fs22 recipient}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1\par }{\f2\fs22 dateOf }{\f10\fs22  }{\f2\fs22 date}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1\par }{\f2\fs22 participantOf }{\f10\fs22  }{\f2\fs22 participant}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1\par }{\f10\fs22 > v  }{\f3\fs22 1 }{\f2\fs22 realizes}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f10\fs22 >\par > v  }{\f3\fs22 1 }{\f2\fs22 exemplifies}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f10\fs22 >\par > v  }{\f3\fs22 1 }{\f2\fs22 embodies}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f10\fs22 >\par > v  }{\f3\fs22 1 }{\f2\fs22 cites}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f10\fs22 >\par }{\f2\fs22 variant }{\f10\fs22  }{\f2\fs22 variant}{\f17\fs16 -}{\f13\fs16 1\par }{\f10\fs22 > v  }{\f3\fs22 1 }{\f2\fs22 temporalFictionOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f10\fs22 >\par > v 8}{\f2\fs22 workTypeID}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f2\fs22 xsd:string\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 languageCode}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f2\fs22 xsd:language\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 countryCode}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f2\fs22 xsd:string\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 manifestationTypeID}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f2\fs22 xsd:string\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 xsdDate}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f2\fs22 xsd:date\par }{\f10\fs22 > v 8}{\f2\fs22 issueID}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f2\fs22 xsd:string\par legislativeCompetenceGroundOf }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 instrumentOf\par result }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 participant\par resultOf }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 participantOf\par embodiedBy }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 recordedBy\par instrumentOf }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 participantOf\par realizes }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 records\par agentOf }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 participantOf\par exemplifies }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 records\par predecessor }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 variant\par embodies }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 records\par patient }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 participant\par instrument }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 participant\par componentOf }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 partOf\par cites }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 refersTo\par recipient }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 participant\par languageVariant }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 variant\par matter }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 instrument\par legislativeCompetenceGround }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 instrument\par successor }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 variant\par exemplifiedBy }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 recordedBy\par patientOf }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 participantOf\par date }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 participant\par realizedBy }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 recordedBy\par REFERENCES 32\par matterOf }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 instrumentOf\par thisRealizes }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 records\par recipientOf }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 participantOf\par thisEmbodies }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 records\par component }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 part\par agent }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 participant\par dateOf }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f2\fs22 participantOf\par }{\f16\fs22 MainComponent }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 DocumentComponent\par Country }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 MURIComponent\par Action }{\f10\fs22 v 9}{\f2\fs22 agent}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Agent\par Action }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 Event\par LegislativePublication }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 LegislativeEvent\par Author }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 Agent\par BibliographicModification }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicCreation\par LegislativeEvent }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 Event\par Editor }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 Author\par EventParticipant }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 Thing\par BibliographicManifestation }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicObject\par BibliographicIdentifier }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicThing\par Matter }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 Instrument\par Patient }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 EventParticipant\par Legislation }{\f10\fs22 v 9}{\f2\fs22 agent}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Legislator\par Legislation }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicCreation\par Addressee }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 Recipient\par BibliographicExpression }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 CitableBibliographicObject\par LegislativeCompetenceGround }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 Instrument\par WorkType }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 MURIComponent\par Legislator }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 Author\par LegislativeModification }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 LegislativeEvent\par LegislativeModification }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicModification\par LegislativeModification }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicExpressionCreation\par CitableBibliographicObject }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicObject\par LegislativeDelivery }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 LegislativeEvent\par LegislativeDelivery }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicWorkCreation\par BibliographicItem }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicObject\par FictionalExpressionCreation }{\f10\fs22 v 9}{\f2\fs22 temporalFictionOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Event\par FictionalExpressionCreation }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicExpressionCreation\par Document }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicManifestation\par BibliographicCitation }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicReference\par BibliographicExpressionCreation }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicCreation\par DocumentFragment }{\f10\fs22 v 9}{\f2\fs22 partOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicManifestation\par DocumentFragment }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicManifestation\par BibliographicThing }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 Thing\par LegislativeCommencement }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 LegislativeEvent\par LegislativeTransposition }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 LegislativeEvent\par Thing }{\f10\fs22 v >}\par {\f2\fs22 REFERENCES 33\par }{\f16\fs22 Edit }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicModification\par InlineFragment }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 DocumentFragment\par DocumentComponent }{\f10\fs22 v 9}{\f2\fs22 componentOf}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Document\par DocumentComponent }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicManifestation\par BibliographicCreation }{\f10\fs22 v 9}{\f2\fs22 agent}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 Author\par BibliographicCreation }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 Action\par Recipient }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 EventParticipant\par Instrument }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 EventParticipant\par ManifestationType }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 MURIComponent\par WorkCreationDate }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 Date\par ExpressionCreationDate }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 Date\par Copy }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicModification\par Event }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 Thing\par Translator }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 Author\par BibliographicObject }{\f10\fs22 v 9}{\f2\fs22 represents}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f10\fs22 >\par }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicObject }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicThing\par BibliographicWorkCreation }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicCreation\par Language }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 MURIComponent\par Translation }{\f10\fs22 v 9}{\f2\fs22 matter}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicExpression\par Translation }{\f10\fs22 v 9}{\f2\fs22 result}{\f15\fs22 .}{\f16\fs22 BibliographicExpression\par Translation }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicModification\par MURIComponent }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 Thing\par BibliographicReference }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 BibliographicObject\par Agent }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 EventParticipant\par Date }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 MURIComponent\par Date }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 EventParticipant\par ContainerFragment }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 DocumentFragment\par BibliographicWork }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 CitableBibliographicObject\par Result }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 EventParticipant\par BlockFragment }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 DocumentFragment\par BibliographicSourceOfLaw }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 CitableBibliographicObject\par CompoundDocument }{\f10\fs22 v }{\f16\fs22 Document\par}\par }