[koheripbal]

As a programmer, every time I try to nail down the flow for a new program, I quickly realize that I'm just writing pseudo-code - and often, just straight code.

Maybe the problem is English. Maybe there's a way to structure English sentences in a more precise and meaningful way with hypertext linking and structuring like a legal document? ...but for human-to-human communications?

[chronikewok]

I like this idea of somehow augmenting human language with more associative structures for deeper meaning and shared understanding.

Maybe one implementation of this is that if the people we talk to (perhaps via a chat app) have their own Zettelkasten, the chat is supplemented/augmented by each others Zettelkasten (either publicly or privately) so we have a deeper understanding of each other and we can go on interesting tangents and create new links. This also aids in more progressive discussions.

(I'll add this concept to my Zettel and see where it takes me :) Thanks for the inspiration)

[johntash]

Be sure to write something about this if you ever take it further. I think it'd be a cool concept and could potentially help connect with people.

I could also see it being too overwhelming and nobody reading the extra context available to them.

[terminalcommand]

Legal documents have cross-references to annexes/addendums. In addition, some words used are defined in the definitions section.

For contracts, there is a customary order, you start with subject of the contract and end with force majeure, severability, term etc.

I don’t believe there is a hyperlinked inherent structure in legal documents. Skilled lawyers can of course draft a meaningful, concise document. But, I think that’s analogous to a skilled programmer writing clear and understandable code.

Most lawyers I know dread formatting and checking for cross-refs.

However, I think we do have one quality, we are used to subconsciously analyze sentences for ambiguities, double meanings, logical contradictions etc. Therefore, lawyers may use English in a way that would do the least harm (or most harm depending on which side they’re on :)).

If we figured out natural language processing or (even if very unlikely) switched our legal documents to an unambigious context-free language such as Lojban, lawyers’ jobs could be entirely automated.

I suspect that impressively structured legal documents stem from templates that have been perfected over the years by multiple lawyers, battle-tested by actual use.

That’s my impression being a junior associate and normally doing the grunt work of checking cross-refs and formatting contracts.