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] Interoperability test requirements for ECF1.1
From: jkeane <>
To: 'Court Filing List' <>
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 12:21:50 -0400
Title: Message
Any way to
separate out test components so we don't exclude a test site of this
calibre?
Many
JusticeLink jurisdictions and the entire Federal CM/ECF system does not
provide for case initiation from lawyers at this time. If /when they move
to LegalXML it would be a shame to leave all them out of a full test that
requires case initiation. In the US DoJ study of eFiling we used the term
initial pleading and responsive pleading because their requirements were so
different. How would Washington state or other react to
a separate test for these two components?
Jim
James I. Keane
JKeane.Law.Pro
20 Esworthy Terrace
North Potomac MD
20878
301-948-4062 F: 301-947-1176 (N.B.: NEW FAX NUMBER)
www.JKeane.com
-----Original
Message-----
From: Krause, Catherine
[mailto:]
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002
4:23 PM
To: Court Filing List
Subject: RE:
[legalxml-courtfiling] Interoperability test requirements for ECF
1.1
Overall, I support the proposed interoperability test criteria and
the proposed ECF 1.1 spec test criteria for interoperability testing. Great work!
I
would like the TC to be aware that King County, Washington would like to offer
to be one of the courts involved in the ECF
1.1 interoperability tests, since we are
implementing ECF 1.1. But, the TC should also be aware that some of
the criteria preclude us from being ready to participate in a test until
(approximately) the 2nd half of 2003
at the soonest; specifically:
-- We have not included case initiation in
the first phase of our project. We do not anticipate utilizing the
metadata relating to parties and attorneys until we implement case
initiation.
-- Our court does not process attachments
separately from lead documents, so in the initial phase of our project we are
not utilizing the attachment metadata. We do anticipate a need to utilize
the attachment metadata when we implement XML documents. But, we do not
plan to implement XML documents as part of our project (other than in the
simple BLOB form) until the Court Document standard is ready, including forms
data (whether that is a separate specification from Document or part of same
specification).
We will be able to provide a report on
other test criteria as it becomes available if that is helpful to the TC, but we
will not be prepared to participate fully until later phases of our project are
completed. We do not have the resources to implement functionality for the
sole purpose of participating in the interoperability
tests.
Sincerely,
Catherine Krause
E-Filing Project Manager
King County Department of Judicial
Administration
(206)296-7860
