legalxml-sc — archive

RE: [legalxml-sc] Juvenile Dependency TC in LegalXML?

From: John Greacen
To: [email protected]
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 00:58:00 -0000

MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->

legalxml-sc message

Subject: RE: [legalxml-sc] Juvenile Dependency TC in LegalXML?

From: "John M. Greacen" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:57:20 -0600

Title: RE: [legalxml-sc] Juvenile Dependency TC in LegalXML?

Jim –

I do believe that juvenile dependency falls within the scope of the LegalXML Member Section.

I am impressed with the points that Roger raises. We have all seen in recent weeks that the existence of the GJXDM does not ensure consistent semantics among specifications and schemas purporting to use it as it was intended. And there is no entity that monitors consistency of GIEPDs for the GJXDM. It is also true that court orders are filings. And we are about to reactivate the Court Document subcommittee, with a focus on an initial list of specific documents/exchanges to be fully marked up for transmission via ECF 3.0. (On the other hand, we have only just begun the discussion of overlap of this Court Document subcommittee work with the work of the IJTC and with other efforts at the NCSC and IJIS.) These factors argue in favor of including a juvenile dependency GIEPD within the ECFTC.

On the other hand, Roger’s analysis would lead to a very expansive scope of work for the ECFTC. There is a real issue of our competency to handle that scope of work. Our work is actually done by a very small subgroup of the TC membership. We may not have the energy or competence to take on the whole of juvenile dependency – let alone the whole of all other topics that would come within our ambit by Roger’s analysis. On the other hand, if the creation of a juvenile dependency effort within ECFTC attracted sufficient interested and knowledgeable people, there would be no reason not to do the work within the ECFTC. I personally believe that the decision to create a new TC or to operate within the ECFTC (or the IJTC) requires the right balance of the benefit of exclusive focus on a small area of effort with the detriment of increased divergence among Member Section products. However, we must resolve the latter issue independently of this particular decision. On balance, then, I come down on the side of a new TC – one that could focus all of its energies on the juvenile dependency task without requiring the ECFTC to include the topic among the list of other topics to which it devotes its energies. (On the other hand, one could argue that the ECFTC will have free time after September to devote to other matters.)

In a recent email, stated that the IJTC has taken itself out of the business of developing specific GIEPDs and is focusing instead on promulgating standards for the process for creating GIEPDs that will produce interoperable end products. If that is true, then there would be no overlap with IJTC. If that is not true – and my recent, very short discussion with about the Court Document subcommittee leads to think that it is not true -- then there is an issue of overlap with the IJTC as well as with ECF 3.0. The IJTC overlap could be addressed by a division of work based on subject matter – the approach that we are going to attempt to use to clarify roles of IJTC and the ECFTC Court Document subcommittee. My sense is that the natural interests of the IJTC focus on criminal justice system exchanges, which would minimize the overlap with juvenile dependency.

I would be willing to be one of the three OASIS members needed to initiate a new juvenile dependency TC within the Member Section. However, I do not have the energy to be actively involved in that TC’s work once it is established. The effectiveness of the TC would depend on our ability to attract other courts people to the TC and to the Member Section. That is eminently doable, though, by using the network of program directors for the Court Improvement Projects funded by HHS in every state for the past ten years, focusing on abuse and neglect cases. It might even be possible to get HHS money to support an OASIS effort in some way.

However we come down as a group on the narrow issue of a new TC or use of an existing TC for this juvenile dependency effort, we must address the issue of horizontal consistency of LegalXML Member Section specifications. I am not comfortable relying on members of the Member Section in general or even the members of other TCs to vet specifications that we develop in the future and ensure their consistency with prior products. For instance, I do not think that members of the ECFTC would take the time to go through a Contracts TC specification to identify inconsistencies with ECF 3.0. This issue of horizontal consistency has been with us ever since the first meetings of Legal XML in 1988. The Legal XML solution was to create a Horizontal Working Group responsible for consistency across all working groups. Persons did volunteer to serve on the working group, but it never functioned; Court Filing was the only working group to develop a specification and there was nothing with which it could be inconsistent. I do not believe that it makes sense to create a new Horizontal TC within the Member Section. Nor do I feel that the Steering Committee itself can take on that responsibility. Here is what I propose.

1. TCs propounding new specifications and schemas will be required to conduct their own comparison with existing Member Section specifications and schemas and bring to the attention of the TCs responsible for those existing products any inconsistencies that they identify. We can use our usual processes to resolve such conflicts, with the understanding that changes to a specification that is already in use require a relatively high threshold of necessity; the other side of that coin is that all standards require periodic updating and revision and the revisions needed by these internal reconciliations can be accommodated by that mechanism.

2. The Member Section Steering Committee will assign to its paid consultant the responsibility for an independent detailed analysis of every newly recommended Member Section specification for internal consistency with existing work. Our paid consultant will therefore become responsible for the ultimate quality control function. In time, it will become clear to all TCs that they will need to involve the consultant in their work at an early stage to ensure that inconsistencies do not develop. That will make that position one of great power and influence. We can counterbalance that power by designating the Steering Committee as the ultimate arbiter of disputes between TCs or between the paid consultant and a TC.

I apologize for making a constitutional law case out of Jim’s relatively straightforward inquiry. I would appreciate comments; I will also put this on the agenda for our next Steering Committee meeting. I believe that Jim is entitled to a response from other Steering Committee members on his juvenile dependency inquiry in the mean time.

From: Winters, Roger [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 4:12 PM
To: 'Cabral, James E. '; '[email protected] '
Subject: RE: [legalxml-sc] Juvenile Dependency TC in LegalXML?

Dear Jim:

My two-cents: I believe this is squarely within the scope of the Court Filing TC, or at least a Court Documents Subcommittee within it. Court orders are ALWAYS filed and therefore they are both court filings and court documents. I do not know what documentation is used for the referrals in question. However, in , we have a distinction between the "legal file" kept in the Juvenile Court Clerk's Office and the "social file," maintained by social workers in our Department of Youth Services. Documents relating to referrals, if they are formal Orders, would be filed. If they are not, they might or might not be considered "attachments" or "exhibits" to be included in the case file in that way.

It seems to me important that we not proliferate TCs based on case types, but rather help the people with focused interests find room and tools within LegalXML to accomplish their purposes. While it may be appropriate to have specialized subcommittees (usually with a sunset) for particular subject matter areas or types of cases, we should work to have all of their artifacts and records being developed in a harmonious way, building on standards.

Roger Winters

-----Original Message-----
From: Cabral, James E.
To: [email protected]
Sent: 7/21/05 3:03 PM
Subject: [legalxml-sc] Juvenile Dependency TC in LegalXML?

LegalXML Steering Committee members:

MTG is interested in participating in a technical committee within OASIS
to focus on the interface between courts and child welfare agencies.
has implemented an XML-based interface between their courts and
child welfare agencies that builds upon previous work by LegalXML.
However, they do not have a forum for presenting that work for
consideration as a standard. We have approached them about possibly
contributing the work through OASIS. Petitions to the courts would
presumably be covered within the scope of Court Filing 3.0. However,
court orders and referrals related to juvenile dependency cases are not
clearly covered by any existing TC.

We have just begun consideration of this TC and have therefore not yet
drafted a proposed charter. However, before we do, I would value some
feedback from the Steering Committee. Specifically, my questions for
the Steering Committee are:

1. Do you agree that this falls within the scope of the LegalXML Member
Section?
2. Does this fall within the scope of any existing LegalXML TCs?
3. How could we define the scope to minimize the overlap of a new TC
with existing LegalXML TCs?
4. Do you know of any OASIS members that would probably be interested in
sponsoring a TC in this area?

Thanks,

James E. Cabral Jr.
MTG Management Consultants, L.L.C.

(206) 442-5010
<file://www.mtgmc.com> www.mtgmc.com

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and
delete the material from any computer.

References:
- RE: [legalxml-sc] Juvenile Dependency TC in LegalXML?
  - From: "Winters, Roger" <[email protected]>