legalxml-sc — archive

[Daniel Greenwood]

As usual, I thank Jim for bringing this important and crosscutting issue to the forefront. I think the issue is a real one, and has certainly surfaced in the eContracts group. It needs to be addressed and it is common to multiple efforts within the LegalXML umbrella However, It is my sense that it would be ideal to delay decision on the need for or potential scope of a new TC until at least the eContracts group has finished our requirements phase and conclusion of the "supported scenarios and use cases". At that point, we'll have a much clearer picture of the underlying needs (business, legal and policy) to be addressed. It is possible that a new TC won't be necessary, if there is a simpler way to deal with the issue in each TC and across TC's (perhaps a by creating a "joint committee" under the OASIS rules, or by using liaisons focused on this issue from each involved TC). Or perhaps we'll find a clear and neatly defined scope that is well suited to the creation of a stand alone TC. In any case, I'd feel more comfortable awaiting the finish of the eContracts requirements setting phase before concluding the decision to set up a horizontal TC that is intended to support the requirements of all LegalXML TC's. Thanks, - Dan Greenwood, OASIS/LegalXML Steering Committee Member and eContracts TC Chair PS: I believe that I don't have permissions to post to Court Filing Document - if so, can somebody please cross-post for me? ============================================== | Daniel J. Greenwood, Esq. | Director, E-Commerce Architecture Program | MIT School of Architecture and Planning | 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Room 7-231 | Cambridge, MA 02139 | http://ecitizen.mit.edu | or http://www.civics.com | dang@mit.edu ==============================================