What's scary is trying to write code that implements a legal document. That's when you find out that much legal language is shot through with logical holes big enough to drive a tank through.
I was asked to implement a municipality's recently-revised alarm permit legislation. I read the old legislation, the new legislation and wrote down questions that weren't covered by either (never mind how to handle the transition between rule sets). At a meeting with all the guilty parties and their lawyers no one was able to answer my questions. They were surprised and embarrassed that so many details had been overlooked. An additional constraint was that, given the political climate, the possibility of properly amending the legislation was slim.
I made a list of suggestions to plug the holes and asked for a sign off. No one wanted to accept responsibility. Finally a division chief relented and the details were swept under the political rug as "regulatory implementation".
So my experience is that legal language is far too vague to translate directly to code.
I was asked to implement a municipality's recently-revised alarm permit legislation. I read the old legislation, the new legislation and wrote down questions that weren't covered by either (never mind how to handle the transition between rule sets). At a meeting with all the guilty parties and their lawyers no one was able to answer my questions. They were surprised and embarrassed that so many details had been overlooked. An additional constraint was that, given the political climate, the possibility of properly amending the legislation was slim.
I made a list of suggestions to plug the holes and asked for a sign off. No one wanted to accept responsibility. Finally a division chief relented and the details were swept under the political rug as "regulatory implementation".
So my experience is that legal language is far too vague to translate directly to code.