Fwd: [legalxml-enotary-comment] Re: eNotarization Markup Language (ENML) Version 1.0

[Ram Kumar <kumar.sydney@gmail.com>]

Members,

 

This is a classical example of TCs within OASIS not kowing what is happening within the OASIS umbrella!

Regards,

 

Ram

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mark Ladd <mark.ladd@addison-one.com>
Date: Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 12:22 AM
Subject: RE: [legalxml-enotary-comment] Re: eNotarization Markup Language (ENML) Version 1.0
To: Ram Kumar <kumar.sydney@gmail.com>

Ram,

 

Thanks for pointing this out.  I was not aware of an alternative party structure.  I will bring this up with the TC on our next scheduled call.

 

 

Mark Ladd

Addison/One, LLC

262-498-0850

 

mark.ladd@addison-one.com

 

 

From: Ram Kumar [mailto:kumar.sydney@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 3:20 AM
To: legalxml-enotary-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [legalxml-enotary-comment] Re: eNotarization Markup Language (ENML) Version 1.0

 

Hi,

 

I am wondering why the current specification did not consider reusing party (name and address) specifications of OASIS Party Information Standard from Customer Information Quality TC? Was it ever considered and if considered, may I know the reason why it was decided not to use the specs?

 

When many of the TCs like Election Markup language, Emergency Management and TaxXML reuse the party standards of CIQ TC, why not your specification?

 

I did not see anything that is very specific to your specs. to do with party information that cannot be implemented using CIQ Specs.

 

Promoting reusability within OASIS TC sets and sends a string and sound message to the community.

 

Regards,

 

Ram Kumar

Chair, OASIS CIQ TC