legalxml-sc — archive

Re: [legalxml-sc] Re: Draft of a universal citation standard problem statement

From: Chet Ensign
To: [email protected]
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 21:53:00 -0000

Because it is a large group, I'll set up a doodle poll to see what works best for folks... On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 4:08 PM, Feldkamp, Anthony (LNG-DAY) < [email protected] > wrote: Yep, let’s meet in January. From: Shifrin, Laurel (LNG-HBE) Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 4:06 PM To: Chet Ensign; Miano, John (LNG-HBE) Cc: Feldkamp, Anthony (LNG-DAY); James E Cabral; Waldt, Dale (LNG-HBE); monica.palmirani; Jamie Clark; Carol Geyer; [email protected] Subject: RE: [legalxml-sc] Re: Draft of a universal citation standard problem statement Sure. From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected] ] On Behalf Of Chet Ensign Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 11:41 AM To: Miano, John (LNG-HBE) Cc: Feldkamp, Anthony (LNG-DAY); James E Cabral; Waldt, Dale (LNG-HBE); monica.palmirani; Jamie Clark; Carol Geyer; [email protected] Subject: [legalxml-sc] Re: Draft of a universal citation standard problem statement All - Wow. The end of the year (if not the world) is already upon us. Are you all interested in a planning call mid-January to discuss getting this moving forward? Bloomberg has joined OASIS and I suspect we will get participation from the BLaw team as well. I'll be happy to send out a meeting invitation for somewhere in the middle of the month. Best wishes for Xmas and NY's ... /chet On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Chet Ensign < [email protected] > wrote: Brilliant. Generating and storing a unique identifier is a topic worth discussing and figuring in. There are models for doing it in publishing / science. Definitely a worthwhile addition. /chet On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Miano, John (LNG-HBE) < [email protected] > wrote: > Let me through something out there. Under the current system there is no unique machine readable identifier. Technically the party names are part of the citation. However they can be abbreviated and truncated in various ways. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Oct 11, 2012, at 4:46 PM, "Chet Ensign" < [email protected] > wrote: > >> I think it does - these are the sorts of situations & requirements >> that really underscore the need for a general mechanism that can >> underlie all sorts of printed variations... >> >> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Feldkamp, Anthony (LNG-DAY) >> < [email protected] > wrote: >>> I did review and agree with Chet. I did have one question about handling >>> modifications, such as the new CO repoters. CO add an 'M1' to the opinion >>> number, but I thought that was covered under : >>> >>>>> 6) It should address a range of citation types and variations to >>> >>>>> address a variety of needs and practical domains. For example, it >>> >>>>> should be capable of traversing or making pinpoint references across >>> >>>>> different instances, compilations or presentations of the same >>> >>>>> material; of disambiguating the correct target when a citation points >>> >>>>> to a location with multiple resources; of supporting automated >>> >>>>> production and automated consumption of the information. >>> >>> >>> >>>