published / research paper / working-paper-v1
Event Ontology of Interpretive Activity
A working paper separating events, records, rules, and interpretation, with model limitations and a validation plan for legal corpora.
01 / PURPOSE
Question and purpose
This working paper proposes a model that separates an event, its record, a rule, and an act of interpretation. Its purpose is to preserve a path from material to conclusion, not to announce a finished legal exchange standard.
02 / SOURCES
Source and input registry
The registry should identify separately the document, its version, actor, time, relationship to an event, and interpretation status. A field label does not replace a source: each entry needs its origin and what remains uncertain.
The scope is set by an identified corpus, not an abstract list of concepts. A record needs the document and its version, relationship to the event described, time, actor, and whether the entry is an observation, quotation, or later interpretation.
03 / METHOD
Method steps
The model separates an event, its record, a norm, and an act of interpretation to preserve the path from material to conclusion.
The method begins by identifying material and an example event, then maps documents, claims, and interpretations to separate fields. Review compares competing records, checks their versions, and records why a relation was accepted or left uncertain.
03A / EXAMPLE
Worked verification example
For one event under study, create separate records for a document, the fact it describes, and a later interpretation. Each record receives its own identifier, version, and relation to the others. When two sources disagree on a date or an actor’s role, do not merge them into a convenient sentence: retain the conflict as a review state and record who may make the next interpretive decision.
04 / TEST
Validation and negative cases
Validation needs examples in which a mention does not establish a fact, several documents describe one event, or a later interpretation changes the meaning of an earlier record. Those negative cases matter more than a fluent representation.
05 / REPRODUCE
Reproduction instructions
Reproduction means applying the model to an identified corpus, preserving the field mapping, and checking whether another researcher can move from a conclusion to a document and from that document to the interpretation boundary.
06 / VERSION
Version and change record
The status remains working-paper-v1. Changes to classes, relations, or identification rules must be recorded with a reason and example because they can alter how earlier material is read.
07 / LIMITS
Limitations
It requires validation on concrete corpora and is not a finished exchange standard.
The model is working-paper-v1, not a certified exchange standard or a mechanism for establishing truth. The same fields may be insufficient for another corpus or question; only an explicit validation example shows what has been retained and where interpretation begins again. The result helps expose a path to material and challenge its weak points, but a qualification decision remains outside the model and needs accountable review.
08 / CITE
Citation
Citation should present the material as a working methodological proposal. It must not be used to claim validation across all corpora or operation as a legal standard.
DOBROVOLA. Event Ontology of Interpretive Activity. Version working-paper-v1, 2026-08-02.BibTeX
@misc{dobrovola2026eventontologyinterpretiveactivity,
author = {DOBROVOLA},
title = {Event Ontology of Interpretive Activity},
year = {2026},
version = {working-paper-v1},
url = {https://dobrovola.dev/en/research/event-ontology-interpretive-activity}
}