Semantic code project: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
Step 1: '''standard proposition''': Select a standard proposition. These will be coded with a “c-” and you can find a complete list here:
===Create (or select) a [[standard proposition]]===
Select a standard proposition. These will be coded with a “c-” and you can find a complete list here:
<categorytree mode="pages" namespaces="Template" depth="0">Template propositions</categorytree>
<categorytree mode="pages" namespaces="Template" depth="0">Template propositions</categorytree>


If there isn’t one, create a new one — but note, the name of the game is to have as few “canonical” propositions as possible. The form should be:
If there isn’t one, create a new one — but note, the name of the game is to have as few “canonical” propositions as possible. The form should be:


{{subtable|'''Name''': t-[NAME]<br><noinclude>{{c|Template propositions}}</noinclude></nowiki>
{{subtable|'''Name''': t-[NAME]<nowiki><noinclude>{{c|Template propositions}}</noinclude></nowiki><br>
'''Content''': <br>
'''Content''': <br>
'''Label''': <nowiki><section begin=label/>{{PAGENAME}}<section end=label/>. <br></nowiki><br>
'''Label''': <nowiki><section begin=label/>{{PAGENAME}}<section end=label/>. <br></nowiki><br>
Line 12: Line 13:


Note:
Note:
*“Label” above is fixed text and will help in correctly taxonomising. Don’t change this.
*Change [NAME] and {VAR1}, {VAR2} and {VAR3} to suit your proposition. Note ALL ARE CASE SENSITIVE. Suggest using only '''lowercase'''. Bear in mind the command calling the template also has to be case-correct.
*Change [NAME] and {VAR1}, {VAR2} and {VAR3} to suit your proposition. Note ALL ARE CASE SENSITIVE. Suggest using only '''lowercase'''. Bear in mind the command calling the template also has to be case-correct.
*“Label” above is fixed text and will help in correctly taxonomising. Don’t change this. Also leave <nowiki><noinclude>{{c|Template propositions}}</noinclude></nowiki> as is — this adds the template to the correct category and helps you to find it later.


Step 2:  
===Create a corresponding proposition in your agreement schema===
You should have an agreement schema (a structured skeleton of the agreement in question. This has a unique taxonomised template name following this format:
[Code] [Agreement] [Edition Year] [Clause reference]. For example, Section 1(a) of the {{2002ma}} is <nowiki>{{Code 2002 ISDA 1(a)}}</nowiki> 
 
Create the new template (eg) <nowiki>{{Code 2002 ISDA 1(a)}}</nowiki> and call the template proposition.




==To do ==
==To do ==
Devise a proposition labelling taxonomy, that can neatly (and predictably) cover: proposition type, agreement type, location and clause reference
Devise a proposition labelling taxonomy, that can neatly (and predictably) cover: proposition type, agreement type, location and clause reference

Revision as of 16:40, 2 January 2021

Create (or select) a standard proposition

Select a standard proposition. These will be coded with a “c-” and you can find a complete list here:

If there isn’t one, create a new one — but note, the name of the game is to have as few “canonical” propositions as possible. The form should be:

{{subtable|Name: t-[NAME]<noinclude>{{c|Template propositions}}</noinclude>
Content:
Label: <section begin=label/>{{PAGENAME}}<section end=label/>. <br>
What: <section begin={VAR1}/> <section end={VAR1}/>. <br>
Which: <section begin={VAR2}/> <section end={VAR2}/>. <br>
Where: <section begin={VAR3}/> <section end={VAR3}/>. }} Note: *Change [NAME] and {VAR1}, {VAR2} and {VAR3} to suit your proposition. Note ALL ARE CASE SENSITIVE. Suggest using only '''lowercase'''. Bear in mind the command calling the template also has to be case-correct. *“Label” above is fixed text and will help in correctly taxonomising. Don’t change this. Also leave <nowiki><noinclude>{{c|Template propositions}}</noinclude> as is — this adds the template to the correct category and helps you to find it later.

Create a corresponding proposition in your agreement schema

You should have an agreement schema (a structured skeleton of the agreement in question. This has a unique taxonomised template name following this format: [Code] [Agreement] [Edition Year] [Clause reference]. For example, Section 1(a) of the 2002 ISDA is {{Code 2002 ISDA 1(a)}}

Create the new template (eg) {{Code 2002 ISDA 1(a)}} and call the template proposition.


To do

Devise a proposition labelling taxonomy, that can neatly (and predictably) cover: proposition type, agreement type, location and clause reference