legalxml-courtfiling — archive
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
— [Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Month Index]
| [List Home]
Re: [legalxml-courtfiling] JXDDS Person Object
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] JXDDS Person Object
- From: Rolly Chambers <[email protected]>
- To: "Rowley, Moira" <[email protected]>,"John M. Greacen" <[email protected]>,Court Filing List <[email protected]>
- Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 13:46:05 -0400
Title: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] JXDDS Person Object
|
It is the semantics. It sounds like the clear consensus is for "party" to
have the more limited meaning of "party to a case" rather than a broader
meaning. I definitely agree that "party" should have the more limited meaning it
customarily receives in court proceedings.
As for a term to describe the broader meaning, I have no
preference between "actor" or "participant". I confess to being unclear about
the benefit or need for a single high level element like "actor" or
"participant."
Rolly
|