Alternative drafting options for the "compliance" concept that we discussed in Atlanta

MHonArc v2.4.5 -->
















legalxml-courtfiling message






[Date Prev]
 | [Thread Prev]
 | [Thread Next]
 | [Date Next]

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [List Home]








Subject: Alternative drafting options for the "compliance" concept that we discussed in Atlanta




From: "John Greacen" <>
To: "Electronic Court Filing Technical Committeee" <>
Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 21:22:10 -0600














I have come up with the following options for consideration
by the TC during the conference call on Tuesday.  The first option follows
the course that the TC took in Atlanta.  The second
follows Dallas Powell’s initial response to the Atlanta
minutes.  The third follows the discussion between Dallas and Shane about Dallas’
comment. I look forward to our discussion on Tuesday.

 

I propose that, whatever the outcome of this discussion,
implementation of the resulting policy become the responsibility of our
Certification Subcommittee chaired by Tom Clarke.

 

Option 1 – notification of the TC of modifications and
extensions

 

Policy Statement

 

The specifications developed by this Technical Committee,
and approved as proposed standards by the COSCA/NACM Joint Technology Committee
have not yet been approved as “recommended standards” because they
are still undergoing interoperability testing.  The Technical Committee
has been asked how application providers should respond to questions posed by
courts procuring electronic filing solutions whether their applications
“comply with” Legal XML standards.  Because the specifications
are still in testing, the Technical Committee authorizes application providers
to answer such questions in the affirmative if:

 

1)      
the application in question uses XML and a DTD that
substantially follows Court Filing 1.O, 1.1, Court Document 1.1, or Query &
Response or a Schema derived from one of those DTDs; and

2)      
the application provider has on file with the OASIS
Legal XML Member Section Electronic Court Filing Technical Committee a document
disclosing all modifications and extensions to the TC’s proposed
specification, together with a narrative statement of the reasons for making
those modifications and extensions.

 

The OASIS Legal XML Member Section Technical Committee will
publish all such documents with the proposed specifications on its website for
the benefit of other users of the specification and for the purpose of
developing future versions of these specifications.

 

Option 2 – notification of the TC and approval by the
TC of modifications and extensions

 

Policy Statement

 

The specifications developed by this Technical Committee,
and approved as proposed standards by the COSCA/NACM Joint Technology Committee
have not yet been approved as “recommended standards” because they
are still undergoing interoperability testing.  The Technical Committee
has been asked how application providers should respond to questions posed by
courts procuring electronic filing solutions whether their applications
“comply with” Legal XML standards.  Because the specifications
are still in testing, the Technical Committee authorizes application providers
to answer such questions in the affirmative if:

 

1)      
the application in question uses XML and a DTD that
substantially follows Court Filing 1.O, 1.1, Court Document 1.1, or Query &
Response or a Schema derived from one of those DTDs; and

2)      
the application provider has on file with the OASIS
Legal XML Member Section Electronic Court Filing Technical Committee a document
disclosing all modifications and extensions to the TC’s proposed
specification, together with a narrative statement of the reasons for making
those modifications and extensions; and

3)      
the Technical Committee has informed the application
provider that its modifications and extensions are not inconsistent with the
intention of the proposed specification.

 

The OASIS Legal XML Member Section Technical Committee will
publish all such documents, and the TC’s response to them, with the
proposed specifications on its website for the benefit of other users of the
specification and for the purpose of developing future versions of these
specifications.

 

Option 3 – notification of the TC and
“discussion” with the TC

 

Policy Statement

 

The specifications developed by this Technical Committee,
and approved as proposed standards by the COSCA/NACM Joint Technology Committee
have not yet been approved as “recommended standards” because they
are still undergoing interoperability testing.  The Technical Committee
has been asked how application providers should respond to questions posed by
courts procuring electronic filing solutions whether their applications
“comply with” Legal XML standards.  Because the specifications
are still in testing, the Technical Committee authorizes application providers
to answer such questions in the affirmative if:

 

1)      
the application in question uses XML and a DTD that
substantially follows Court Filing 1.O, 1.1, Court Document 1.1, or Query &
Response or a Schema derived from one of those DTDs; and

2)      
the application provider has on file with the OASIS
Legal XML Member Section Electronic Court Filing Technical Committee a document
disclosing all modifications and extensions to the TC’s proposed
specification, together with a narrative statement of the reasons for making
those modifications and extensions; and

3)      
the application provider satisfactorily answers all questions
posed by the Technical Committee [or any of its members] about its
implementation of the proposed specification.

 

The OASIS Legal XML Member Section Technical Committee will
publish all such documents, together with questions posed by the Technical
Committee [and its members], answers from the application provider, and the TC
chair’s statement that the answer(s) are satisfactory to the Technical
Committee, with the proposed specifications on its website for the benefit of
other users of the specification and for the purpose of developing future
versions of these specifications.

 

I welcome additional options for the TC’s
consideration on Tuesday.

 

 

 

John M. Greacen

Greacen Associates, LLC

HCR 78, Box 23

Regina, New Mexico 87046

505-289-2164

505-780-1450 (cell)

 


















[Date Prev]
 | [Thread Prev]
 | [Thread Next]
 | [Date Next]

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [List Home]