Hi all, I'm a co-founder of Open Law Library, the non-profit that built the platform DC uses to codify and publish their laws. We were so excited when we saw a member of the public make a PR. I'm happy to answer any questions.
This is really awesome and I hope to see something like this come to my country.
One thing I was wondering is how you would deal with more tricky issues/pull requests. Obviously we probably won't see people writing whole new laws in the pull requests editor but what if it was something like a sentience was written in an unclear way and someone opened an issue asking for it to be clarified or maybe they made a PR rewriting it to make more sense while still keeping the intent the same?
We are in talks with several international governments. We would be delighted to help your country!
The system does not in any way change the legislative process, so you cannot use a pull request to make any substantive change to the law. That would include rewording, changing punctuation, fixing numbering, etc. If such a pull request were made, it would be immediately closed. As throughout history, the only way to make a substantive change to the law is to petition your representative to sponsor a bill and then convince the legislature to pass it.
So, essentially, the pull request process is useless. In fact, even changing a typo could be seen as a substantive change since it may not always be 100% clear what the correct change is. For example, in the Colored Object Restrictions Act 2018, Section 12.3.7 it might say "It is not permitted to have purple colored caqs within the city limits." could be talking about 'cats', 'cars' or maybe 'caps', and although it's obvious a typo has slipped through, these possible fixes all have very different meanings. And in the cases where the typo is obvious, and there is only one possible interpretation of the text, it doesn't actually matter and the change wouldn't have any impact...
Ah fair enough. I guess this limits the PR system to just fixing typos. Still it seems almost all of the value is in providing really easy and up to date info to everyone. Awesome work.
Kind of out there, but what prevents modification of the law from bad actors? Git history plays a part but is it possible for someone to edit a change and play all the subsequent changes on top of it, with the hope that nobody notices the sha change?
We have internal systems that allow us to audit/authenticate the repository. We will be deploying a cryptographic authentication framework based on TUF in Q1 2019 that will make it possible for _anybody_ to audit/authenticate the repository.
