This semester I am doing an independent study, tentatively entitled “The dual challenges of online legal publication: hackability vs. authenticability.” I’ve committed to submitting the literature review section of my paper to my advisor by Tuesday. (Or ON Tuesday?) Consequently, I’m beginning the literature review section today. (Kidding. I’ve been working on research since the beginning of the semester.)
I came across a video from a presentation given at Rutgers Law School last summer about developing a UELMA-compliant platform for New Jersey statutes. The subject of the presentation was described as “how the N.J. Statutes could be made available cheaply, and in an UELMA compliant manner.” Exactly what I’m looking at.
Only the presenter pronounces the name of the law as “You-Lee-Muh.” I’m a very picky person, and things like that annoy me. It’s unfair, I realize.
Ultimately, I gave up on the video halfway through. The presenter shared some important ideas: make sure to have permanent versioning, links to session laws, ways to deal with repealed sections, etc (see approximately minute 25:30), but didn’t–at least in the part of the video that I watched–address the question of authenticability. I have other sources for research on hackability; if the program is advertised as being about UELMA, I expect it to address authenticability.
And please, people, pronounce it right.