Artificial Intelligence and Law

, Volume 15, Issue 1, pp 49–76 | Cite as

Separating law from Geography in GIS-based eGovernment services

  • Alexander Boer
  • Tom van Engers
  • Rob Peters
  • Radboud Winkels
Open Access


The Leibniz Center for Law is involved in the project Digitale Uitwisseling Ruimtelijke Plannen [DURP (; digital exchange of spatial plans] which develops a XML-based digital exchange format for spatial regulations. Involvement in the DURP project offers new possibilities to study a legal area that hasn’t yet been studied to the extent it deserves in the field of Computer Science & Law. We studied and criticised the work of the DURP project and the Dutch Ministry of internal affairs on metadata for regulatory documents, and made an inventory of issues related to legal knowledge representation that it felt were not sufficiently covered by current initiatives in the Geographic Information Systems (GIS) field. This inventory was an input to the DURP standardisation effort. In a second phase of the project we extended the METALex XML schema (cf. Boer et al. 2002; Boer et al. 2003) for ‚regular’ legal sources that we developed in the past for geospatial regulatory information, in order to support exchange of spatial regulations, including the associated geospatial information in the form of maps. We developed a prototype application and demonstrated how the spatial planning information in GML can be combined with XML with only minimal changes, using the Web Ontology Language (OWL). This paper describes our experiences.


GIS GML law norms semantic Web 


  1. Alchourron C., Bulygin E. (1981) The expressive conception of norms. In: Hilpinen E., (eds) New studies in Deontic Logic. D. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp 95–124Google Scholar
  2. Boer A. (2000) The Consultancy Game. In: Breuker J., Leenes R., Winkels R., (eds) Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (JURIX-2000). Amsterdam, IOS Press, pp 99–112Google Scholar
  3. Boer A., Hoekstra R., Winkels R., van Engers T., Willaert F. (2002) META lex: Legislation in XML. In: Bench-Capon T., Daskalopulu A., Winkels R., (eds) Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (Jurix 2002). Amsterdam, IOS Press, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  4. Boer, A., van Engers, T. and Winkels, R. (2003). Using Ontologies for Comparing and Harmonizing Legislation. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL), Edinburgh (UK), ACM PressGoogle Scholar
  5. Boer A., Winkels R., van Engers T., de Maat E. (2004) A content management system based on an event-based model of version management information in legislation. In: Gordon T., (eds) Legal Knowledge and Information Systems. Jurix 2004: The Seventeenth Annual Conference. Amsterdam, IOS Press, pp 19–28Google Scholar
  6. Dorninger P., Kippes W., Jansa J. (2004) Technical push on 3d data standards for cultural heritage management. In: Schrenk M., (ed.) Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Information and Communication Technology in Urban Planning and Spatial Development and impacts of ICT on Physical Space. Wien, Austria, CORPGoogle Scholar
  7. Grau, B. C., Horrocks, I. and Parsia, B. (2005). Online proceedings of the first owl: Experiences and directions workshop. Scholar
  8. Hall, M. and van Orshoven, J. (2003). Spatial data infrastructures in Australia, Canada, and the united states. Commissioned by the eu, in the framework of the inspire initiative, KU Leuven (SADL+ICRI)Google Scholar
  9. Hansson S. O. (2001) The Structure of Values and Norms. Cambridge University Press, UKGoogle Scholar
  10. Hess, C. and de Vries, M. (2004). From models to data: a prototype query translator for the cadastral domain. In Electronic Proceedings of the Workshop on Standardization in the Cadastral Domain, Bamberg, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  11. Hopkins, L., Kaza, N. and Pallathucheril, R. (2003). Planning Markup language: Representing the Meanings of Plans and Regulations. In Proceedings of the AESOP/ACSP Joint Conference, Leuven, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  12. Kaza (2004). Spatial representation of property rights: Considerations on doxastic and epistemic systems. In Geog495B&M: GIS and SocietyGoogle Scholar
  13. Peters, R. and van Engers, T. (2004). The Legal Atlas: Map-based Navigation and Accessibility of Legal Knowledge Sources. Knowledge Management in Electronic Government; 5th IFIP International Working Conference, KMGov 2004, Krems Austria, Springer Verlag, ISBN 3-540-22002-X, pp. 212–220Google Scholar
  14. Wilson, F. and Peters, R. (2004). Mapping the Law: Knowledge Support for Business Development Enquiry. In Proceedings of the eChallenges 2004 Conference, IST Programme, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  15. Winkels R., Boer A., Breuker J., Bosscher D. (1998) Assessment based Legal Information Serving and Co-operative Dialogue in CLIME. In: Hage J., Bench-Capon T., Koers A., de Vey Mestdagh C., Gütters C., (eds) Proceedings of JURIX-1998. Nijmegen: Netherlands, GNI, pp 131–146Google Scholar
  16. Winkels R., Boer A., Hoekstra R. (2002) CLIME: Lessons learned in Legal Information Serving. In: van Harmelen F. (eds) Proceedings of the European Conference on Artificial Intelligence Lyon. Amsterdam, IOS-Press, pp 1–2Google Scholar
  17. Winkels, R., Boer, A. and Hoekstra, R. (2003). META lex: An XML Standard for Legal Documents. In Proceedings of the XML Europe Conference, London (UK)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexander Boer
    • 1
  • Tom van Engers
    • 1
  • Rob Peters
    • 1
  • Radboud Winkels
    • 1
  1. 1.Leibniz Center for Law, University of AmsterdamAmsterdamNetherlands

Personalised recommendations