Talk:Lex Iunia de iure iurando (Nova Roma)
From NovaRoma
(Difference between revisions)
(Comments.) |
(Use of talk page, marking corrigendis changes) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
- [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus|Cordus]] 13:25, 25 August 2007 (CEST) | - [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus|Cordus]] 13:25, 25 August 2007 (CEST) | ||
| + | :That sort of explanation is another of the sort of thing that should be here, on the talk page, not cluttering up the main article. [[User:M. Lucretius Agricola|Agricola]] 13:36, 25 August 2007 (CEST) | ||
==Divergence from text as enacted== | ==Divergence from text as enacted== | ||
| Line 18: | Line 19: | ||
- [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus|Cordus]] 13:25, 25 August 2007 (CEST) | - [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus|Cordus]] 13:25, 25 August 2007 (CEST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :I think that we need to have a way to show when ''corrigendis'' changes have been made. It should be clear to the reader and simple to use. Maybe <u>underlining</u>? We should also '''require''' those persons who make these changes to note simple ones in the edit summary and substantial ones on the talk page. [[User:M. Lucretius Agricola|Agricola]] 13:36, 25 August 2007 (CEST) | ||
Revision as of 11:38, 25 August 2007
Use of "scriptum" box
The "scriptum" box should contain only the text of the lex itself. Text such as "Voted by the comitia centuriata" should not be inside the box (and in fact is redundant since it is already given in the boxes above), nor should "legal links".
- Cordus 13:25, 25 August 2007 (CEST)
Official foreword
The official foreword is almost incomprehensible.
- Cordus 13:25, 25 August 2007 (CEST)
- That sort of explanation is another of the sort of thing that should be here, on the talk page, not cluttering up the main article. Agricola 13:36, 25 August 2007 (CEST)
Divergence from text as enacted
The text of this lex is not the same as the text which was approved by the comitia. The official foreword appears to say that these subsequent changes have been made under the provisions of the lex Equitia de corrigendis legum erratis. The lawfulness of these changes is in doubt.
- Cordus 13:25, 25 August 2007 (CEST)
- I think that we need to have a way to show when corrigendis changes have been made. It should be clear to the reader and simple to use. Maybe underlining? We should also require those persons who make these changes to note simple ones in the edit summary and substantial ones on the talk page. Agricola 13:36, 25 August 2007 (CEST)
