The RDF legal dictionary is technically innovative in a number of ways. The main one is that it uses RDF
(Resource Description Framework) to describe XML Schema documents. This is a
new way of using RDF, which is a structured data format particularly suited to
creating typed links between documents. More usually RDF has been used to
describe HTML web pages, for example for creating metadata for describing a web
page using the Dublin Core vocabulary (http://www.dublincore.org/). Here we use
it to describe the content not just of individual XML pages but W3C XML Schema
pages, themselves written in XML. An XML Schema expresses constraints on any
XML document that conforms to that schema. But it also effectively summarises
the possible content of all conforming XML documents, so that instead of
creating data describing each individual XML document, we can simply describe
the schema, and then state that documents conforming to the schema containing
element x can also be described as being of type y. If successful, this
technique represents a major increase in efficiency in the creation of links
between documents, and the method will be applicable to any XML schema-based
application. It can be used, as in this case, for creating what might be called
a common vocabulary for describing a particular subject such as Law, with
minimum re-cataloguing effort and no change to the original documents to create
cross-mappings between different XML schemas.
XML is becoming extremely important to businesses in the EU. It provides
the flexibility of producing machine-readable structured data for any
application. This flexibility has a tendency to lead towards interoperability,
and commonly a business, organisation or government will begin with an in-house
XML vocabulary for its documents, and only later need to share documents with
another organisation with its own
format. Using RDF to map between XML Schemas and a common vocabulary
provides an extensible and scalable means of
mapping between schemas without either organisation having to change the
data held in databases or documents, because the method is really one of
annotating schemas using RDF. The method is generic to XML, and so can be used
in other arenas.
The traditional classification of legal terms is a hierarchy. The
broadest term stands at the top, refined by narrower terms. Each (narrow) term
has no more than one broader term as its „parent“. Hierarchical classification
is, after a flat list, the easiest way to classify terms. For a long time people have been aware that hierarchical classification is a rather inadequate way
of describing legal reality. The reason that hierarchical classification remains
the most practised way of classifying probably lies in the means of storage.
Any piece of information should be stored just in one place. If one stores it in more than one place, the
possibility of inconsistencies is created. Unless stored in a computer
system, this requirement usually can be
satisfied only in a flat list or hierarchical structure. Of course the strict
hierarchical structures in such traditional systems are often softened by card
indexes, thesauri and other cross linking methods. But the basis is and remains
a hierarchical structure.
Legal databases have, so far, in practice not brought any significant
other method of storing and retrieving, apart from full text search. Full text
search offers relief in some cases, in many cases it is a rather inaccurate and
inefficient way to find one’s way in an information surplus.
Legal ontologies promise development in this field, certainly where they
apply RDF based ontology languages like DAML+OIL. RDF breaks through hierarchy
by allowing multiple inheritance. A (narrower) term can have more than one
broader term as parents. A legal ontology contains a structured view of the
legal system, which view potentially comes closer to legal reality than
traditional structured views.
What does the RDF Dictionary add to these developments? The RDF
Dictionary is not a legal ontology, at least not in the traditionel sense. It
does in itself not try to describe the legal system. What it does, is link
structures to one another. It facilitates the interoperability, the
communication, between data structures. Such a structure is in most cases an
XML Schema, describing the structure of a particular kind of legal document,
like judgement or contract. The legal RDF Dictionary not only links these
structures, it also offers a user the possibility to compare various structures
and use the structure which best suits his needs at that moment for the
particular task he is performing. A structure once made is in principle static.
As things change over time a structure may in parts loose its usefulness. The
RDF Dictionary makes sure a user can always choose to use the latest structure.
He may even mix parts of structures, as RDF offers the capability of mixing
namespaces. Namespaces in this context are nothing more than one particular XML
Schema or a legal ontology.
As it is often problematic to translate legal terms litterally from one
language to another language (each term being embedded in its own jurisdiction
and legal culture) the RDF Dictionary uses legal "Archetypes" to map
key legal concepts across language and jurisdiction borders. An example for
judgement/Urteil/vonnis can be found in a very first draft for an RDF
Dictionary (http://rdf.lexml.de). Judgement is described by its aspects, each
aspect being a legal Archetype, like: "written",
"enforceable", "subject to appeal", "rendered by a
public body", "preceded by proceeding between two or more
parties".
The innovations covering a wide range of possibilities, the proposal has
chosen one application to show the advantages of these innovations. A web
interface which makes use of XML Schemas to enable a user to access a foreign
website, retrieve and interpret its information in a better way than he could
have than without the web interface. Furthermore he is offered information
related to a retrieved document.
„Foreign“ in this context means a legal system which he did not study
and a language which is not his mother tongue (and may even to a large extent
be incomprehensible to him).
An improvement in information retrieval means a gain of time and
quality, in particular in the profession of a lawyer where information is the
main material to build the product of a lawyer: documents. The re-usability of
retrieved XML-data in the documents to be written increases these advantages.
XML with the RDF Dictionary concept can improve the communication between
lawyers, thereby again increasing efficiency and quality. Also the
communication between citizens and their governments may be increased through
better retrieval of legal information.