YEARS OF EUROPEAN ONLINE ANNÉES DE EN LIGNE ...
YEARS OF EUROPEAN ONLINE ANNÉES DE EN LIGNE ... YEARS OF EUROPEAN ONLINE ANNÉES DE EN LIGNE ...
Publications Ofice estimates that three categories of actions will be required: easy elements which can be implemented right away, medium-term elements which require some development, and long-term elements which might include redesigning the information structure or deeper relection before implementation. this last category might imply the ordering of a more detailed study. Besides the usability study, suggestions or requests for adaptations or changes might come from users with whom the Publications Ofice is in contact — mainly through the help desk — from the Groupe interinstitutionnel Lex (GIL), the Council working party, and from professionals encountered from time to time at conferences, fairs, etc. Further facilitating the access to legal information the ‘Directory of Community legislation in force’ has its origins in a request of the Council in the 1970s. Since the new EUR-Lex was created, the directory has been updated monthly. Its structure allows for a stable classiication of acts. within the database, preparatory acts are also classiied by the chapters and sub-chapters of the directory. this means that the available metadata allow for a directory of preparatory acts belonging to still-pending legislative procedures, which could also be updated monthly. A speciic directory of consolidated versions could present only the last available layer of consolidation, mentioning — if this were the case — the last modiier that had not yet been integrated. the last task which will be mentioned here is PreLex. By a resolution of 19 December 2002, the European Parliament required a better integration of various information systems existing in the ield of law and mentioned under more (old) EUR-Lex, CELEX and PreLex. Old EUR-Lex and CELEX have now become a new integrated system. for PreLex, the Secretariat-General of the Commission decided that its core business certainly included the production of the data and the use of them internally but that the dissemination falls under the competencies of the Publications Ofice. Negotiations about the handover of the dissemination of PreLex data are under way and by the end of 2007 the public system of PreLex should be with the Publications Ofice. In addition to ensuring regular production of the dissemination data and maintenance of the system, the Publications Ofice will also begin to analyse how the PreLex data could be integrated into the existing sets of EUR-Lex metadata in order to merge EUR-Lex and PreLex, knowing that the same information on legislative procedures as today should continue to be available to the user. this would 01_2007_5222_txt_ML.indd 56 6-12-2007 15:13:39
MEETING OF THE COUNCIL WORKING PARTY ON LEGAL DATA PROCESSING mean that in the long term PreLex information would be based on further enriched metadata in EUR-Lex and merged with EUR-Lex. 3. thE fUtURE BEyOND 2007 managing a database is down to earth, but it should not prevent us from seing EUR-Lex in perspective. the president of the academic session yesterday mentioned 2016. Let’s however stick with 2010 or 2012. EUR-Lex will have undergone an evolution and hopefully the right evolution, but could we also develop a vision like the visions of the 1960s which gradually created CELEX and EUR-Lex? what suggestions can be put forward? One proposal is to establish better connections to research in the ield of legal informatics. Of course, research in legal informatics has different levels: irst there are steps towards a solution which might become reality after many years, then research which brings concrete results in the medium term, and, inally, research which delivers conceptual solutions which could be analysed for implementation in the short term. to better connect to research in the ield of legal informatics, the Publications Ofice could promote the use of EUR-Lex content for research purposes. EUR-Lex content can be made available for researchers under three conditions: the research project has to have a multilingual dimension, the content cannot be used commercially, and the Publications Ofice is entitled to receive the various reports on the research results. Another means is also to follow research projects which are published or presented at conferences in order to follow the long-term evolution of thoughts and horizons in the ield. Let us just take a few examples. the concepts of ontologies, taxonomies and topic maps have been circulating in the research community on legal informatics for many years. Prototypes have been developed, but mostly with very narrow contents. how could these concepts be applied to such multilingual corpora as EUR-Lex? If we admit that it is not possible to fully create new documentary tools ‘manually’ and apply them to hundreds of thousands of units, it might be possible, on the basis of existing and used documentary tools, to reorganise the information retrieval. Online documents are still presented in the way in which printed versions would appear. Should totally different rules be followed or should the length of lines, at least, be deined morphologically, to make them more readable for users? 56 | 57 01_2007_5222_txt_ML.indd 57 6-12-2007 15:13:39
- Page 5 and 6: INTRODUCTION APRèS LA PUBLICAtION
- Page 10 and 11: wORKShOP Legal XmL — Use of XmL f
- Page 12 and 13: 01_2007_5222_txt_ML.indd 12 6-12-20
- Page 14 and 15: Cette énumération des participant
- Page 16 and 17: 01_2007_5222_txt_ML.indd 16 6-12-20
- Page 18 and 19: sion a fait de l’initiative «mie
- Page 20 and 21: II. «mIEUX LéGIféRER» Et L’AC
- Page 22 and 23: 01_2007_5222_txt_ML.indd 22 6-12-20
- Page 24 and 25: • et L. E. Allen, spécialiste de
- Page 26 and 27: La création d’un réseau de coop
- Page 28 and 29: 01_2007_5222_txt_ML.indd 28 6-12-20
- Page 30 and 31: Stele so weit nähern, dass er den
- Page 32 and 33: nicht autorisierte Abschrift der of
- Page 34 and 35: „Die Anforderungen und Bedingunge
- Page 36 and 37: hat, „Zugänglichkeit und Verstä
- Page 38 and 39: Old testament. this passage is set
- Page 40 and 41: this checkpoint is given a Priority
- Page 42 and 43: knowledge of the law. Adults, child
- Page 44 and 45: It is a dificult task to predict th
- Page 47 and 48: MEETING OF THE COUNCIL WORKING PART
- Page 49 and 50: SOUVENIRS D’UNE DÉLÉGUÉE NATIO
- Page 51 and 52: EUR-LEX TODAY AND TOMORROW After mo
- Page 53 and 54: MEETING OF THE COUNCIL WORKING PART
- Page 55: MEETING OF THE COUNCIL WORKING PART
- Page 59 and 60: DOCUMENT ANALYSIS AND LEGAL INFORMA
- Page 61 and 62: MEETING OF THE COUNCIL WORKING PART
- Page 63 and 64: MEETING OF THE COUNCIL WORKING PART
- Page 65 and 66: MEETING OF THE COUNCIL WORKING PART
- Page 67 and 68: LIFE AS A CELEX HOST INtRODUCtION I
- Page 69 and 70: MEETING OF THE COUNCIL WORKING PART
- Page 71 and 72: MEETING OF THE COUNCIL WORKING PART
- Page 73 and 74: CONCLUSIONS first, I would like to
- Page 75 and 76: En tant que déléguée de la Grèc
- Page 77 and 78: LEGAL XML — USE OF XML FOR THE PR
- Page 79 and 80: WORKSHOP • publishing technologie
- Page 81 and 82: WORKSHOP • NiR and the NiR editor
- Page 83 and 84: WORKSHOP tors, thus providing the o
- Page 85 and 86: WORKSHOP 3. SCOPE the expected resu
- Page 87 and 88: WORKSHOP gestützt auf die Verordnu
- Page 89 and 90: WORKSHOP which describe general com
- Page 91 and 92: WORKSHOP Arithmetic Poetry. Ameri
- Page 93 and 94: WORKSHOP Metadata fields collected
- Page 95 and 96: WORKSHOP tion of the common metadat
- Page 97 and 98: ELECTRONIC PUBLISHING OF LEGISLATIO
- Page 99 and 100: WORKSHOP the working group has focu
- Page 101 and 102: WORKSHOP • the integrity of a rec
- Page 103 and 104: WORKSHOP Examples of different appr
- Page 105 and 106: WORKSHOP conidence uses certiicatio
MEETING <strong>OF</strong> THE COUNCIL WORKING PARTY<br />
ON LEGAL DATA PROCESSING<br />
mean that in the long term PreLex information would be based on further enriched<br />
metadata in EUR-Lex and merged with EUR-Lex.<br />
3. thE fUtURE BEyOND 2007<br />
managing a database is down to earth, but it should not prevent us from<br />
seing EUR-Lex in perspective. the president of the academic session yesterday<br />
mentioned 2016. Let’s however stick with 2010 or 2012. EUR-Lex will have<br />
undergone an evolution and hopefully the right evolution, but could we also<br />
develop a vision like the visions of the 1960s which gradually created CELEX<br />
and EUR-Lex? what suggestions can be put forward?<br />
One proposal is to establish better connections to research in the ield of<br />
legal informatics. Of course, research in legal informatics has different levels:<br />
irst there are steps towards a solution which might become reality after many<br />
years, then research which brings concrete results in the medium term, and,<br />
inally, research which delivers conceptual solutions which could be analysed<br />
for implementation in the short term. to better connect to research in the ield<br />
of legal informatics, the Publications Ofice could promote the use of EUR-Lex<br />
content for research purposes.<br />
EUR-Lex content can be made available for researchers under three conditions:<br />
the research project has to have a multilingual dimension, the content<br />
cannot be used commercially, and the Publications Ofice is entitled to receive<br />
the various reports on the research results. Another means is also to follow<br />
research projects which are published or presented at conferences in order to<br />
follow the long-term evolution of thoughts and horizons in the ield.<br />
Let us just take a few examples.<br />
the concepts of ontologies, taxonomies and topic maps have been circulating<br />
in the research community on legal informatics for many years. Prototypes<br />
have been developed, but mostly with very narrow contents. how could<br />
these concepts be applied to such multilingual corpora as EUR-Lex? If we admit<br />
that it is not possible to fully create new documentary tools ‘manually’ and<br />
apply them to hundreds of thousands of units, it might be possible, on the<br />
basis of existing and used documentary tools, to reorganise the information<br />
retrieval.<br />
Online documents are still presented in the way in which printed versions<br />
would appear. Should totally different rules be followed or should the length<br />
of lines, at least, be deined morphologically, to make them more readable for<br />
users?<br />
56 | 57<br />
01_2007_5222_txt_ML.indd 57 6-12-2007 15:13:39
Change language