(03-27-2019, 01:23 PM)Rebeltopia Wrote: 1. Not really. If theres a  "A.LPA.0319", then a  "A.LPA.0319.1", the first is assumed to be .0, then the 2nd .1, and so on.

(Note: the next paragraph is not meant to be taken completely seriously)
What?
Just... what?
Is your job computer coding? Because computers would think that...
But a non-computer guy would assume "...0319.1" is the first and "0319 (nothing else)" is someone who isn't following the code.
 

(03-28-2019, 09:38 PM)Amerion Wrote: TSSS would have a fit if they saw this thread

Quick! Delete the thread!
(Also you are the guy who suggested this XD)
 

(03-28-2019, 01:12 AM)Bzerneleg Wrote: You know what? The current bill numbering system that we use works perfectly fine. It is universal and can apply to any type of bill: amendment, resolution, treaties, etc. We may as well codify it too.

We have a current bill numbering system? Wat? Because I don't see any trace of it?
 

(03-28-2019, 02:29 PM)Seraph Wrote: I just want to say, this entire thread gives me a headache and at no point did any of it seem like it would make the assembly more accessible, but rather quite the opposite.

That being said, I did enjoy watching people debate in what appeared to be code for four pages. XD

...really? Because if you think about it, something along the lines of:
LawName.Date.Number of bill. whatever you want Should make sense after a while