legalxml-courtfiling — archive

RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Resolution of Q& R issue - closes Octo ber23d

From: Catherine Krause
To: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 13:41:00 -0000

MHonArc v2.5.2 -->

legalxml-courtfiling message

Subject: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Resolution of Q& R issue - closes Octo ber23d

From: "Krause, Catherine" <[email protected]>
To: Electronic Court Filing TC <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 10:39:09 -0700

Title: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Resolution of Q& R issue - closes Octo ber 23d

I concur with Shane's assessment below regarding version numbering. It makes sense to number our specs as 1.1.x if the only change is to replace placeholders with an import from another specification.

If as Shane suggests it could be done without negating compatibility between CF 1.1 and a CF 1.1.x, I support the concept of importing the Q&R DTD into the Court Filing 1.1 DTD in the current place holders for "query" and "response"; this was described by Rolly I believe as using Court Filing as the "master" specification. If I understand Shane's suggestion below, a version 1.1.1 could be used for an implementation that imports the detailed query and response elements; a version 1.1.2 could be used for an implementation that imported another place holder in 1.1, etc. If, as Dallas suggests, a court wasn't interested in using the imported elements, they would not need to do so.

We eventually will also have needs to including some of the "response" elements as the result of a "filing" as Dallas has described; returning case schedule information, judge assignments, payment confirmations, etc.

On the other hand, if CF 1.1.x would not be compatible with CF 1.1, I am not in favor of importing Q&R into CF 1.1. I would then support Shane's original proposal to import appropriate CF 1.1 elements into Q&R, with Q&R being the "master" specification.

Diane suggested that we conclude this discussion during the November 5th conference call and come to a consensus, which would then be posted to the list per standard procedure. I support Diane's suggestion.

Thanks,

Catherine Krause
E-Filing Project Manager
King County Department of Judicial Administration
(206)296-7860
[email protected]