On Tuesday 27 April 2010 12:47:23 Benoit Boissinot wrote: > On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Alexander Harrowell > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tuesday 27 April 2010 08:59:50 Francis Davey wrote: > > > >> > >> It would be great if some legislature did this right, then we could > >> point at it when arguing with the others. Estonia? > >> > > > > When I mentioned this to Daniel "dsquared" Davies, he pointed to the German > > Bundestag's Web site. But looking back at it, it looks like a really, really > > good and comprehensive index for debates and documentation - with the actual > > texts safely locked up in PDF files. Grrr. > > I guess it was a reference to the eNorm stuff? http://www.enorm.bund.de > From what I know, for the law drafting part of eNorm, it's mostly a MS > Office plugin used by the editors to ensure they enter structured data > (which is I think a quite pragmatic and valid approach). > But maybe they are not at a state where they publish the resulting xml > to the web (which is a shame because it shouldn't cost them much). > When I was at an Official Gazette conference [1] few years ago, it > looked like they were one of the most advanced countries in that area > (editing laws as structured document). > > Benoit > > [1] the presentation of enorm I've seen, in french: > http://www.legalaccess.eu/spip.php?article51&artsuite=0 >
Very interesting. Got to love the Germans - they wrote software to recommend you terms from the official handbook of civil service writing... -- The only thing worse than e-mail disclaimers...is people who send e-mail to lists complaining about them
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Mailing list [email protected] Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
