Within the scope of this feasibility study and prototype, it has been impossible to provide any systematic attempt to indicate levels of quality and reliability of a site, and to some extent it may invite adverse legal consequences to do so. However, in any permanent system, this issue would have to be addressed, at least to the extent of a clear indication of which sites appeared to be provided by official bodies and which did not, and perhaps an indication of the date a site was indexed. It is a far more resource-intensive step to provide evaluations of site quality.
There is, however, a pragmatic justification for indexing sites which have no official status and no known reputation (as many University sites have). Many users will often have no alternative conveniently accessible source of information at all available to them. Even if, for example, an English translation of another country's privatisation law is of unknown quality and could not be relied upon in detail, it may well be very valuable information to find simply that another country has a privatisation law, and a general indication of its features. This may then make it sensible to undertake a more specific enquiry (perhaps via DIALogue) to obtain an official copy of an Act the existence, name and general value of which is now known. Internet legal research can be very valuable provided users are well aware of the limitations and risks of reliance.