Markup, Typesetting and the Law by Roger Horne Almost all of the documents on this site have been coded using HTML, the "language" of the Web. HTML is a "mark-up" language: the text, which is in ASCII form, is marked up with ASCII codes which the browser which you use to look at the page interpets in order to decide how to format the text. The browser does not have to interpet the codes in any particular way. To take a simple example, <EM>some text</EM> tells the browser to emphasise the words "some text". It is up to the browser to decide how to do this. Usually it will by default display the text in italics, but this is not compulsory and the user may be able to change this default to some other font which is available on his machine. Mark-up is useful for structured documents. A statute is a structured document. It starts with a title, this is followed by a preamble, which is in turn followed by a number of sections. There may be some schedules at the end. The draftsman of such a document using textual mark-up will not be concerned with what the finished document will look like. He simply has to put into the text the appropriate markup which will show where each part of the document starts and ends. Someone else can use that mark-up to produce the final output which may differ depending on the use to which it is to be put: the layout of an Act is often slightly different from that of the Bill. But the output may also be put into a database. An ASCII file has the advantage over a file in a standard word-processor format in that it can be searched easily and fast. As an example of this, the files which make up "The New Land Law" on this site contain mark-up intended to be used for the purposes of the index. They take the form <!--INX:Interest in possession!beneficial-->. To search all 160 odd files (containing some 70,000 words) for lines in this form and put the details into a file which forms the basis for the index takes about ten seconds. Most documents produced by barristers are structured. A specially endorsed writ issued in the High Court, for example, will have as a header the name of the division in which it is issued plus the case reference. This will be followed by the names of the parties and this in turn will be followed by the required formal wording, ending with the cross-heading "Statement of Claim". The allegations of fact which follow are themselves followed by the words "And the Plaintiff claims--" and the prayer. The document ends with the usual formal parts and normally has a backsheet giving details of the parties and so on. HMSO have used HTML to mark-up the statutes enacted from 1996 onwards. Unfortunately HTML was not designed for this job and the HTML code uses (and misuses) the commands available in the language to the full. A section of a statute may contain sub-clauses, sub-sub-clauses, paragraphs and even sub-paragraphs, each of which will be indented by a particular amount in the printed edition. To achieve this using HTML is extremely difficult. It can be said that HTML (or HyperText Markup Language) is a version of SGML (or Standard Generalised Markup Language), but that is an oversimplification. SGML sets out how the code of a markup language should be specified. The grammar of that language is defined in a Document Type Definition (or "DTD"); the HTML grammar is specified in such a DTD. There are many other DTDs. All statutes and statutory instruments have for a number of years been coded using SGML and so there will be a DTD which specifies the grammar for this. It presumably includes codes such as <SECTION>,</SECTION>, <SUBSECTION> , </SUBSECTION> and so on. Unfortunately so far as I know there is no browser available to the public which can read such codes. (The HTML version is presumably converted from the original SGML version.) To produce a decent-looking specially endorsed Writ using HTML would probably be very difficult; I do not know if anyone has tried to do it. No one so far as I am aware has yet written a SGML DTD for the purpose, let alone produced a browser that would display text marked up using the grammar specified in such DTD. There are other mark-up languages available. The one which I use is the typesetting language TeX, a version of which is available on almost every computer now made. TeX is normally used with a "macro package" which is similar to a DTD. The most commonly used such package is called "LaTeX" which is used by most mathematicians in the World to typeset their work. I use my own package called, with little originality, LeXTeX. What follows shows I use this particular mark-up language. The work of a Chancery barrister falls broadly into three categories, that is to say, advisory work, the drafting of pleadings (in the widest sense of that expression) and the drafting of other documents, such as contracts, leases and Wills. LeXTeX is designed to deal with all of these. To produce a specially endorsed Writ the user needs to give as a minimum details of the parties, the case's reference in the Chambers' computer (which will include the name of the Solicitors), the allegations of fact and the prayer. So the LeXTeX file could take the form-- % A percent sign (%) introduces a comment. % All TeX commands start with the "escape" character "\" % and may include a parameter in brackets "{}". % The command "\cl" means clause or paragraph. % \colsref{SUEGRA/99} % This is the "ACE" reference to the case \solsref{S/123} % And this is the Solicitor's reference % \ch % Start the proceedings in the Chancery Division \plaintiff{JOHN DOE} \defendant{RICHARD ROE} \writ \cl The Plaintiff did this. \cl The Defendant did that. \claims \cl The other \cl Costs \bye If this file is run through LeXTeX four pages of output will result which can be seen here. Clicking on any of the images will link to a full size version It will be seen that the program did all the layout and included the formal parts automatically; the Solicitor's name and address was taken from a database. This is, of course, a very simple example. The rules now require that an Affidavit and its backsheet must be endorsed with various particulars including the name of the deponent and details of the exhibits to it. It is also customary to use the initials of the deponent coupled with a number when referring to the exhibits. LeXTeX can deal with this automatically. It is often useful, admittedly not often in an Affidavit, to include cross-references. If the document is subject to a lot of amendment it is possible for references to get out of date and, for example, to refer to the wrong paragraph of the document. Most mark-up languages avoid this problem by referring to markers in the text rather than to existing paragraph numbers. For example in a LeXTeX file the marker could take the form \xref{This}. A reference elsewhere in the file to \clref{This} will always insert the correct reference to the clause in which the marker appears. Here is a slightly more complicated, and highly artificial, file demonstrating this-- \colsref{SUEGRA/99} % This is the "ACE" reference to the case \solsref{S/123} % And this is the Solicitor's reference % Information for charging purposes: \timetaken{1.5} % Time spent in hours \casetype{trust} \value{50,000} % omit pound sign. \difficulty{2} % out of 5 \skillfactor{3} % out of 5 \novelty{4} % out of 5 \legalaidno{} % Legal Aid number (if any) \comments{Rhubarb, rhubarb.} \urgency{4} % out of 5 \contact{Mr Sue} \plaintiff{JAMES McTAVISH COOK-WILSON} \plaintiff{JOHN DOE} \plaintiff{FRANK SMITHERS} \defendant{RICHARD ROE} \defendant{JAMES SMITH} \matter{Greenacre Farm} \matter{Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996} \ch \deponent{JAMES McTAVISH COOK-WILSON} \of{Blackacre Farm, Lincoln's Inn Fields, London WC2} \occupation{Farmer} \affidavit \cl I am one of the Plaintiffs to this application and I am duly authorised by John Doe and Frank Smithers to make this affidavit on behalf of all of us. Save as otherwise appears it is made from my own knowledge. \cl This case concerns a trust of land established by a Deed dated 1st April 1990. This is now \exhibited.\xref{This} \cl The land was conveyed to the then trustees of the deed by a Conveyance of the same date. That is now \exhibited.\xref{That} \cl The defendants are the present trustees of both the Deed referred to in \clref{This} and the Conveyance described in \clref{That}. \cl The other documents consist of the voluminous correspondence which is now \bundled.\xref{Other} \cl A further copy of \exhibitref{Other} (which was exhibited to \clref{Other} on \pageref{Other} is now \exhibited. \bye If the Affidavit is run through LeXTeX the result will again be four pages which are shown here-- Clicking on any of the images will link to a full size version The ability to cross-reference using symbolic names rather than numbers is particularly useful in complicated documents where it is possible, for example to refer to "...the restrictions set out in \clref{main} of \schedref{smith}" which might be formatted as "...the restrictions set out in Paragraph 3 of Schedule 5". TeX permits a number of documents to be included in the same file and cross-references can be used between such files. So it is possible, for example, to include cross references to the paragraphs of some document in an accompanying Note which explains such provisions. The main difficulty with complicated documents is getting the formatting of the clauses correct. There are two forms of numbering in common use. The first is the form used in statutes, where each clause, sub-clause, sub-sub-clause and so on has its own number or letter and is indented a particular amount. Sometimes, as in this extremely artificial example, the text of a clause will resume after a couple of subclauses--- Clicking on the image will link to a full size version With LeXTeX and other markup languages (other than HTML) it is easy to achieve this. The LeXTeX code for the file of which the above is--- \cl This is a Clause \scl This is a subclause\xref{sc} \sscl This is a sub-sub-clause \sscl\ssscl This is a sub-sub-clause which has an immediate paragraph \ssscl And a second paragraph \sssscl Which has a couple of its own sub paragraphs \sssscl This being the second \ssscl A third paragraph \nscl Back to \clref{sc} \scl Another sub-clause \ncl And now back to the original clause \cl And another clause Advisory work normally requires less complicated formatting than pleadings and other draft documents. However it it still necessary to produce backsheets and charging information for the clerks. It is also common to include quotations. In LeXTeX these are surrounded by the markup \beginquote and \endquote. The default style uses a smaller font for quotations and indents them by a fixed amount. An Opinion in a non-litigation matter could take the following garbled form-- \bstitle{RE BESWICK} \solsref{G/456} \colsref{SUEGRA/102} \contact{G Grabbit} \faxsheet % Produce a fax cover sheet. \opinion Old Peter Beswick was a coal merchant in Eccles Lancashire. He had no business premises. All he had was a lorry, scales and weights. He used to take the lorry to the yard of the National Coal Board, where he bagged coal and took it round to his customers in the neighbourhood. His nephew, John Joseph Beswick, helped him in the business. He and his nephew John went to a solicitor who drew up an agreement for them. The agreement was quite short--- \beginquote Peter Beswick to assign to John Joseph Beswick the goodwill, motor lorry, scales, weights and other trade utensils of the business of a coal merchant hitherto carried on by him in consideration of the transferee employing the transferor as consultant to the said business for the remainder of the transferor's life at a weekly salary of \pounds6 10s. \endquote It is clear that the widow, as administratrix of a party to the contract, would be entitled to an order for specific performace of the promise by the nephew. The courts of equity can and do grant specific performance of a contract to make a money payment and have ample machinery for enforcing execution. \bye Here is the result--- Clicking on any of the images will link to a full size version TeX certainly is not for everyone; it is not a very user friendly program. (However those who use it tend to become addicted to it.) In order to use it you first prepare your file in a text editor or word processor and save it in ASCII format (but with the appropriate markup). You then run it through TeX which results in a device independent file. This is run through a printer driver and the resulting file is sent to the printer. All of which takes rather longer to describe than to do. The standard benchmark for TeX is "the TeXbook" by Professor D.E.K Knuth. This is a hardback book of 483 pages, the TeX source, amounting to about 1.3 decimal megabytes, has been made available for testing purposes. On my Acorn Risc PC it take about one minute to run it through teX and a further minute and a half to run it through a printer driver (resulting in a file of about 7.5 decimal megabytes). Printing a document that long would take rather longer. Writing it would take longer still. What I hope is that this very brief introduction has shown is that a mark-up language such as TeX or SGML can separate the text of a document from its formatting in a way that enables the lawyer to concentrate on what he is good at, rather than on the layout of the document.