RE: [LegalXML-sc] Reminder - Quarterly status reports

MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->

legalxml-sc message

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

--

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

Subject: RE: [LegalXML-sc] Reminder - Quarterly status reports

From: "Bergeron, Donald L. (LNG-DAY)" <>

To: "'John Greacen'" <>, 

Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 09:21:41 -0400 

Legislation Technical Committee

 

            
The TC held a 
workshop collocated with  National Conference of State Legislatures' 
NALIT and Legal Services groups as well as parties from other areas. Twelve 
people attended the meeting.

 

Discussion 
with Subject Matter 
Experts from State Legislatures Information Technology and 
Legal Services ensued. We talked through an initial collection 
of Legislative Information Document Artifacts, noting that although the artifacts 
were often the same, the names varied.  We further talked through an 
initial model of legislative interactions, including state 
transitions within legislative process, provided by Propylon, 
a provider of solutions for 
Legislatures. They noted that some document 
types had 
been created under an NCSL effort led by Jeffrey Blanchard 
of Florida. We will be contacting 
him so such valuable work can be brought into this 
effort.

 

Everyone could see 
long-term benefits to having  intra-state standards for the document 
artifacts at least for export or interchange. It was clear from the discussion, 
however, that there was 
no near-term 
realizable benefit that the states 
participating in the discussion would derive from participating in 
the standards effort.  States in 
attendance have developed or are currently engaged in development of 
artifacts and systems, already incurring the cost of development. Therefore, 
they did not believe they could convince people responsible for Legislative 
budget that participation is a priority. This is a similar response to what Joe Carmel from the 
IT office of the US House of Representatives expressed at an earlier point in 
time.

 

They did see the value 
of actively reviewing Legislative 
Document interchange specifications, as they often provide such 
documents currently on an ad hoc basis in different 
formats. A standard format would save them time and effort. 

 

Given the above, we have begun looking at focusing our 
efforts on support for Legislative-Regulatory Compliance. This will involve the 
need to support interoperative, exchange level Legislative and Regulatory 
Content as well as a standard placement for valued added annotations. It will 
also focus initially on the registration or a client's need for this data 
likely via either a subscription model or other appropriate 
form.

 

Given this, the committee is considering a change in 
charter or the closing of this TC and the creation of a new TC within LegalXML 
in this more focused space. This will likely be a major topic at our November 
19th Face to Face meeting in Washington DC.

 

Planning for this workshop continues with Goal 
Statements and Roadmaps being drafted.

 

Regards, 

Don 

Donald L. Bergeron
Systems Designer
LexisNexis

O 937-865-1276
H 
937-748-2775
M 937-672-7781