I have a weird distaste of how law is written for a long time. Laws are difficult to understand and follow. For example, definitions are often unclear and depends on past rulings. Meaning the law itself is not suffice to decide if an action is legal or not. This really irritated me. The fact that I can’t know with 100% certainty if my actions will be considered legal prior to acting makes me feel uneasy.
Why can’t we just write laws like we write RFCs? With clear SHOULD, SHOULD NOT, MUST and MUST NOT? And with clear reference to other sections such that any uncertainty would be discovered and solved.
Also why didn’t this happen? I feel it would bring much more efficiency to the society. And less lawyer arguing over details that the even the law makers proposing said law didn’t know about.
I agree that this is the way it should be done. In fact there’s no reason we can’t just have congress (or your local relevant rulemaking body) set up a git server. The issue is that your congresscritters don’t want that. That makes it much easier to properly assign blame, which they’re allergic to.