[Open-Legislation] at4am (dot) eu (was: RE: French civil code on git)

Wed Apr 8 12:33:55 UTC 2015

Thank you Erik for the info. This may actually fit in a research project we
are currently working on. Perhaps we can do something here.

Best, Clemens

2015-04-08 14:00 GMT+02:00 JOSEFSSON Erik <erik.josefsson at europarl.europa.eu
>:

>  AT4AM is, litteraly, an automatic tool for amendments that we use in the
> EP. Here's a demo: https://vimeo.com/17598642
>
> The the key purpose of the .5 M€ Pilot Project 26 03 77 05 is to make
> AT4AM look, feel and behave the same
> for all - citizens, MEPs, assistants and staff alike. Money is expected to
> be allocated before summer.
>
> DFRI keeps one old AT4AM version up and running:
>
> http://ghajini.dfri.se:8080/at4am/editor.html?documentID=8
>
> Currently we're trying to run the last version *and* get a grip on what
> is different between that version and the EP version:
>
> http://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/at4am_source_code
>
>
> If you want to help getting more money for this projects, now is the time
> to write up Pilot Project proposals and try to have them tabled by
> supportive MEPs:
>
> https://at4am.eu/pipermail/at4am/2015-March/000108.html
>
>
> Would be lovely if you’d subscribe and share your ideas on the at4am.eu
> list. Here's the archive:
>
> https://at4am.eu/pipermail/at4am/
>
>
> Best regards.
>
>
> //Erik
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* open-legislation [open-legislation-bounces at lists.okfn.org] on
> behalf of Francis Davey [fjmd1a at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday 8 April 2015 12:34
> *To:* stef
> *Cc:* open-legislation
> *Subject:* Re: [Open-Legislation] French civil code on git
>
>
>
> 2015-04-08 11:20 GMT+01:00 stef <s at ctrlc.hu>:
>>
>>
>> well the data is there, to show diffs, you really don't need git. by using
>> github, you only 1/ put yourself at the mercy of a commercial service
>> provider
>>
>
>  The data may be "there" but I don't know where "there" is for French
> legislation - so this is nice because I can find it easily.
>
>
>> 2/ externalize the development costs of a proper userinterface for doing
>> diffs. 3/ you ignore at4am.
>>
>>
>  I spent 5 minutes at at4am and have no idea what is usable there.
>
> Eg the page:
>
>  http://www.at4am.org/howto/
>
>  says
>
>  Provide the URL to an Akoma Ntoso document in argument of the editor URL:
>
>  But what editor is this? Where do I get it. Hard to tell. For example:
>
>  http://code.at4am.org/nsesa-editor
>
>  has a two word README that doesn't tell me what I am supposed to do with
> the source once I have got it. Presumably there's a java applet or
> something that I run somehow.
>
> There's just nothing obvious on that site on *how* I actually make use of
> anything there, so I hope that explains why I might be pleased to see some
> other tool that I do understand how to use.
>
>  Are there amendments to the French Civil Code there (for instance)? If
> not, then it is hardly an alternative. Maybe they are available somehow
> that way, but in an undocumented way.
>
>  So, indeed, github is a commercial service, but so are most web
> services. At least it uses a standard system (git) which can be used
> elsewhere.
>
>
>>
>> > Github also makes it easy to clone the corpus elsewhere.
>>
>> that is a feature of git, not github. also why would you do that? how
>> often is
>> that a requirement, and how often is git data the best format to do
>> further
>> processing?
>>
>
>  What alternatives are there? I mean ones I can actually use right now
> and that don't require me to write extensive code to access? I had a look
> at Akoma Ntoso and decided that it was hopelessly wrong in design for
> representing actual legal texts and haven't bothered to look further.
>
>  Being able to clone onto my desktop means I can read it when I am
> offline, simply, without having to worry about a brand new bit of software
> and framework.
>
>
>>
>> > I agree that pull requests may be unrealistic, but there is nothing even
>>
>> hah, of course. but even blame is unrealistic.
>>
>
>  I didn't suggest blame as a reason. That was someone else.
>
>
>>
>> > vaguely like that for professional engagement with UK legislation.
>> Drafting
>> > amendments to existing law would be easier if they could be submitted
>> like
>> > that.
>>
>> to me this looks like people with hammers running around and seeing nails
>> everywhere.
>>
>
>  Not me.
>
>  --
> Francis Davey
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-legislation mailing list
> open-legislation at lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-legislation
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-legislation
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-legislation/attachments/20150408/143cb6ec/attachment-0002.html>