Bibliography

Every source the brief relies on, in Chicago style, ordered by the hierarchy the project uses to weigh them: primary law and courts first, then regulators and EU institutions, then research, then press and advocacy. A source that carries no locatable URL is listed anyway, and marked as such — the gap is part of the record.

Data quality, measured on this load

Four views of what the record establishes and what it does not, each computed from data/*.json when this page loads — none of these numbers is written into the page. The open backlog is the same computation the build runs (tools/validate.mjs). It counts records that admit to being unestablished; a record that is wrong and does not say so is invisible to it, and to every check in this project.

The open backlog

Counting…

Where the verification dates fall

Counting…

Freshness, by what a record is about

Counting…

Provenance: which sources carry the claims, and how

Counting…

Loading the bibliography, with its filters and the uses of each source. Until it arrives — or without JavaScript — this is every source, 189 in all, by tier:

Primary law and courts 37

Regulators and EU institutions 90

Research 7

Industry, advocacy and press 55

A note on method

What a citation here means. Each note in the brief records not only which source is attached to a claim but what that source actually does for it: whether it states the proposition, supports it in part — establishing a narrower case, or the components a figure is computed from — or is only context, which is not a citation at all. A URL alone was never treated as evidence.

Where a source is missing. Some works the brief refers to could not be pinned to a specific publication during the source pass. Those entries appear with no public URL located rather than being quietly dropped or replaced with a loosely related substitute.

Verification dates. Every claim, enforcement record, timeline event and instrument carries a verification date of its own, and the records were not all checked on the same day: the panel where the verification dates fall counts them from the data on every load, so it cannot go stale the way a sentence here did. A date says when a record was last checked, not that it is still true. Negative claims — statements that something has not happened — are true only at an instant, and that instant is their own verification date.

What the notes actually rest on. Counting…

How each claim is graded. A single "requires verification" flag was doing five jobs at once, and it made an argument — which no citation can ever settle — look like a fact still waiting for a source. Every claim is now graded on what actually carries it. The grade is derived from the claim's type and its sources on every load, never stored, so it cannot drift away from the evidence it describes.