Note demo

Bekijk de volgende demo notes en bekijk ook de HTML (via ‘Text’ mode in de editor) om het voorbeeld te zien.

Demo note in lopende tekst met rich content (bold, link) en paragraaf via whitespace shortcode.

Paragrafen zal je moeten toevoegen via de whitespace shortcode gevolgd door een [shift] + [enter]. Bekijk de code van het volgende:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Donec laoreet est rutrum metus tincidunt vestibulum. Proin vitae nibh neque. Aenean quis orci ornare, hendrerit metus quis, volutpat arcu. Suspendisse scelerisque porttitor risus ac ornare. Click here for a note Nunc tincidunt bibendum congue. Donec rutrum sed neque at hendrerit. Aliquam rutrum sem vel diam facilisis pulvinar. Cras nec arcu sed tortor vulputate fringilla quis id massa. Mauris bibendum arcu non urna scelerisque vehicula. Quisque sed vehicula metus, sit amet tristique nibh. In hac habitasse platea dictumst.

Nieuwe paragraaf fulla justo quam, finibus eu tristique vel, faucibus ut massa. Ut quis tempus nibh. Nulla ac tortor odio.

Vestibulum vulputate cursus condimentum. Pellentesque venenatis eleifend gravida. In hendrerit sollicitudin rutrum. Nulla facilisi. Mauris nec elit sit amet odio gravida gravida. Curabitur pharetra metus urna, quis consectetur nisi sodales id. Phasellus rhoncus velit ut malesuada varius. Proin efficitur mattis elit sit amet aliquet. Donec lobortis tempor fringilla. Orci varius natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus.

Demo note tussen 2 paragrafen met rich content (bold, link)

Je kan er ook voor kiezen om een note op een aparte line te plaatsen, dus tussen twee paragrafen in. Deze note kan ook rich opmaak bevatten inclusief paragrafen (met behulp van de whitespace shortcode, maar geen list items (althans niet zonder workarounds; zie hieronder).

Click here for a note Nunc tincidunt bibendum congue. Donec rutrum sed neque at hendrerit. Aliquam rutrum sem vel diam facilisis pulvinar. Cras nec arcu sed tortor vulputate fringilla quis id massa. Mauris bibendum arcu non urna scelerisque vehicula. Quisque sed vehicula metus, sit amet tristique nibh. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Nutella justo quam, finibus eu tristique vel, faucibus ut massa.

Ut quis tempus nibh. Nulla ac tortor odio. Nam at turpis nunc. Ut suscipit ac enim quis molestie. Fusce tempus eu augue vel efficitur. Pellentesque nec ex feugiat, commodo ante ut, aliquam risus.

Demo note met een numbered list in lopende tekst (workaround)

Lists zijn helaas niet mogelijk binnen een note, maar er zijn wel workarounds mogelijk. Zo ook met wat toevoegingen zoals de whitespace shortcode. Dit voorbeeld is ook besproken in Ticket #773143. Human rights due diligence ‘Human rights due diligence’ (often abbreviated to ‘HRDD’) is “a way for enterprises to proactively manage potential and actual adverse human rights impacts with which they are involved.” The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) clarify that all businesses have a responsibility to respect human rights and to do this they can conduct HRDD.

The UNGPs outline four steps of HRDD:

1. “Identifying and assessing actual or potential adverse human rights impacts that the enterprise may cause or contribute to through its own activities, or which may be directly linked to its operations, products or services by its business relationships;

2. Integrating findings from impact assessments across relevant company processes and taking appropriate action according to its involvement in the impact;

3. Tracking the effectiveness of measures and processes to address adverse human rights impacts in order to know if they are working; and

4. Communicating on how impacts are being addressed and showing stakeholders – in particular affected stakeholders – that there are adequate policies and processes in place.

HRDD is also considered in the counter-strategy on making soft law into hard law. to help reframe the actions, omissions, and failures of the company as the problem and call into question company protestations of non-responsibility. These legal concepts directly challenge common corporate denials of knowledge or responsibility for harms, and civil society actors often use them in legal claims against companies. In some cases, redefining corporate claims as the problem can be the first step to legislative reforms (see the counter-strategy on advancing corporate accountability norms).

Demo note met een unnumbered list (bullet items) in lopende tekst (workaround 1)

Lists zijn helaas niet mogelijk binnen een note, maar er zijn wel workarounds mogelijk. Zo ook met wat toevoegingen zoals de whitespace shortcode en de bullet html entity. Human rights due diligence ‘Human rights due diligence’ (often abbreviated to ‘HRDD’) is “a way for enterprises to proactively manage potential and actual adverse human rights impacts with which they are involved.” The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) clarify that all businesses have a responsibility to respect human rights and to do this they can conduct HRDD.

The UNGPs outline four steps of HRDD:

• “Identifying and assessing actual or potential adverse human rights impacts that the enterprise may cause or contribute to through its own activities, or which may be directly linked to its operations, products or services by its business relationships;

• Integrating findings from impact assessments across relevant company processes and taking appropriate action according to its involvement in the impact;

• Tracking the effectiveness of measures and processes to address adverse human rights impacts in order to know if they are working; and

• Communicating on how impacts are being addressed and showing stakeholders – in particular affected stakeholders – that there are adequate policies and processes in place.

HRDD is also considered in the counter-strategy on making soft law into hard law. to help reframe the actions, omissions, and failures of the company as the problem and call into question company protestations of non-responsibility. These legal concepts directly challenge common corporate denials of knowledge or responsibility for harms, and civil society actors often use them in legal claims against companies. In some cases, redefining corporate claims as the problem can be the first step to legislative reforms (see the counter-strategy on advancing corporate accountability norms).

Demo note met een (unnumbered/numbered) list items (in een list) in note (workaround 2)

Met een workaround is het toch ook mogelijk om een bulleted list item te tonen, ook weer met de whitespace shortcode. De voorwaarde is echter wel dat de notes zelf óók in een list opgesomd worden.

Dit voorbeeld is ook besproken in Ticket #393252 (2019). Op OECDWatch wordt hier veel gebruik van gemaakt. Voorbeeld:

Why to file an NCP case despite a parallel proceeding
There are several reasons why complainants might want to file an OECD Guidelines complaint even though another court or tribunal is considering a related case:
- The legal proceedings are “stuck” – i.e. indefinitely delayed or unreliable due to court corruption or incompetence – and therefore not a viable means of resolving the dispute.
- The OECD Guidelines are broader than the corresponding legal framework and may permit consideration of issues the court cannot deal with.
- The NCP can serve as creative, collaborative facilitator of positive outcomes unavailable through combative legal action.

What the Guidelines say on parallel proceedings The OECD Guidelines’ Procedural Guidance states clearly that NCPs should not reject a case simply because parallel proceedings are underway:

Paragraph 26. When …

What this means is that NCPs should only reject a claim (portion of a whole complaint) if considering it would “seriously prejudice” the parallel proceeding. NCPs can and should accept all claims within a complaint that can be reviewed without causing serious prejudice to the parallel proceeding.