legalxml-courtfiling — archive

RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] JXDDS Person Object

From: System
To: [email protected]
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 19:54:00 -0000

 MHonArc v2.5.2 -->
















legalxml-courtfiling message






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

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [Elist Home]








Subject: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] JXDDS Person Object




From: "Poindexter, Gary W" <[email protected]>
To: "'John M. Greacen'" <[email protected]>,Court Filing List <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 18:52:10 -0500






As I interpret the proposal and the proposed person model:

A PersonType can be a witness, victim, judge, suspect (role) type. An
OrganizationType "Is A" victim or suspect or crime scene type; and a
PlaceType "Is A" crime scene or victim type. This means that we define our
documents (SuperObject) as people, organizations and places.

Is this the model we want for justice documents? 

What if a document type (arrest report, court filing, warrant, ad museaum)
is made up of ("Has-A") witness, judge, victim, crime scene, etc
(roles/types)? In this model a VictimType "Is-A" PersonType,
OrganizationType or PlaceType. A WitnessType "Is-A" PersonType. A
CrimeSceneType "Is-A" OrganizationType or PlaceType. 

The second approach allows us to define our model with roles per document
type (answers a question raised in one of the posts I believe) and define
persons, organizations and places per role. The proposed model says that we
define our documents as having persons, organizations and places that are
victims, witnesses or crime scenes.

I am asking a question not making a judgment even though I prefer the
latter. I also believe that the latter definition is more consistent with
the current OJP DD, which isn't a big issue other than it would potentially
improve backward compatibility as we migrate to a "new and improved" OJP DD.

gary