legalxml-courtfiling — archive
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
— [Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Month Index]
| [List Home]
[legalxml-courtfiling] RE: [legalxml-courtfiling-policy] OASISLegalXML ECF Court Policy Requirements document
MHonArc v2.5.2 -->legalxml-courtfiling message
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [legalxml-courtfiling] RE: [legalxml-courtfiling-policy] OASISLegalXML ECF Court Policy Requirements document
- From: "Bergeron, Donald L. (LNG-DAY)" <[email protected]>
- To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>,"'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>,"'[email protected]'"<[email protected]>,"'[email protected]'"<[email protected]>
- Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2002 13:53:29 -0500
I have revised this
document to address the issues raised by the two
people voting to not concur All specific items were directly
addressed. Two issues were indirectly addressed and they
are:
1. Is the Version 1
family of specifications provide a robust framework on which a policy
specification can rest. This was raised by both Chris and Shane. This will be
addressed in the Technical Committee Roadmap as per the following note in the
document.
Note: The decision of the Court Filing Technical Committee to implement these requirements within a specification as a whole or in part will be specified in the Court Policy Technical Committee Roadmap. Any phasing of these requirements shall be specified in the Court Policy Technical Committee Roadmap. The choice is pending to suspend development or the Version 1 family of specifications giving Version 2 activities preference. This will be reflected in the Court Policy Technical Committee Roadmap.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] — [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Month Index] | [List Home]