RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Results of voting on ECF 3.0

I congratulate the TC on this accomplishment.
I add my thanks to drafting team for their amazing effort. Further, I would
like to thank John Greacen and Tom Clarke for their leadership in making sure
the many, many decisions of the TC were accurately reflected in the resulting
work product!

 

A voice of thanks is also due to Roger
Winters for his editing and his focus on the need for the technical to be understandable
as practical to the court community.

 

Further, I
think a word of ackwoledgent must be brought to the Integrated Justice TC for
their work on naming and design rules and deliverable packaging that so well
supported the modular approach used.

Lastly, I would like again to thank to
entire TC especially those who provided input time and time again for their perseverance in bringing this to a sucessful not end but
beginning. 

Regards, 

Don 

Donald L. Bergeron 

Systems Designer 

LexisNexis 

 

O 937-865-1276 

H 937-748-2775 

M 937-672-7781 

From: John M. Greacen
[mailto:] 

Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005
6:52 AM

To: Electronic Court Filing
Technical Committeee

Cc:
; 

Subject: [legalxml-courtfiling]
Results of voting on ECF 3.0

 

I am delighted to report that the Technical
Committee’s voting members have overwhelmingly approved ECF 3.0, its
executive summary, and the signature and messaging profiles as committee drafts
for recommendation to the COSCA/NACM Joint Technology Committee as a proposed
standard.  Congratulations to all of us for bringing ECF 3.0 to this stage
of maturity.  Many of us who have labored for almost six years on this
project doubted at many junctures that this day would ever arrive.  I
particularly wish to thank Eric Tingom, Jim Cabral
and his colleagues at MTG, and Scott Came
for their drafting efforts which gave the concepts and ideas of the TC members
concrete embodiment and amplified them into a complete specification and
associated artifacts.

 

There were three negative votes.  All three expressed
the view that ECF 3.0 is premature for adoption as a national standard.  I
personally believe that all members of the TC agree that testing is required
before ECF 3.0 is ready for prime time.  The Joint Tech Committee’s
process also recognizes this.  We are recommending that the Joint Tech
Committee approve ECF 3.0 as a “proposed standard” for the purpose
of widespread review and testing of the specification in operational
settings.  The Joint Tech Committee’s process calls for a second
level of approval – as a “recommended standard” – once
that testing has been done, the inevitable modifications that such testing will
disclose have been made, and the modified specification has been shown to
support interoperable implementations.  In the executive summary, we
explicitly request the Joint Tech Committee’s assistance in conducting
the necessary implementation and interoperability tests.  

 

Consequently, although their votes will continue to be
recorded as “no”s, I personally choose to interpret the statements
of the three dissenters as supporting the TC’s approval of ECF 3.0 as a
committee draft ready for implementation and interoperability testing, which
was the question before the TC.

 

John M. Greacen

Greacen Associates, LLC

HCR 78 Box 23

Regina, New Mexico 87046

505-289-2164

505-289-2163 (fax)

505-780-1450 (cell)