Discussions on Governmental Body

Is there any reason not to follow the procedures and terms as defined and used by the House and the Senate?

I there any reason not to conform to the methodology of the House and the Senate?

http://clerk.house.gov/art_history/house_history/Session_Dates/sessionsAll.html

http://senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/one_item_and_teasers/Years_to_Congress.ht 

Here's the Senate's definition of session:

session - The period during which Congress assembles and carries on its regular business. Each Congress generally has two regular sessions (a first session and a second session), based on the constitutional mandate that Congress assemble at least once each year. 

It seems this schema has been improperly designed, but my knowledge of schemas is not sufficient for me to state this with any degree of certainty.

The House and Senate doc's, however, are clear, and, furthermore, are clearly different from Freebase.

What is the next step here?

Actually, in looking at this more closely, the issue is that the property "sessions" is associated with the type Governmental Body which is generic to all types of governments, not something specific to the United States. I'm not familiar enough with the world's governments to know if there's a good word which would be more appropriate than "sessions" for which is encoded here.

The next step is to get more informed opinions from someone that knows more about this than me, specifically the domain administrators http://www.freebase.com/view/government#domain-members.  They're the only ones that can change things anyway, assuming that a change is needed.

Thanks for catching the ambiguity in the terminology.  The schema is intended to capture Congresses (Knessets, Dumas, Parliaments, etc.), rather than what are typically called sessions, so name "session" was probably the wrong choice. The use seems to be that the period between elections is called by the name of the legislative body, but we can't call the type and properties "Legislative Body", since that would be too easily confused with the "Governmental Body" type.

Maybe "Instance of Governmental Body" (since executive bodies like the Swiss Federal Council also use this type), or something similar?

Please let me know what you think.