Re: [legalxml-courtfiling] JXDDS Person Object

[Mohyeddin Abdulaziz <abdulaziz@apltwo.ct.state.az.us>]

Greetings,

I still prefer the Actor/Role model.  I do not agree that "Actor" should be replaced by "Party" or
"Participant" for the exact reason proponents of the change seem to suggest - that "actor" is not
clear.  The actor can be a person or organization. In a case, an actor may be a party, participant
or may have some other role.  For example, the superior court files the "trial court record" of
the case to the Court of Appeals or a court reporter files a transcript.  The organization
(superior court) and the person (court reporter) in this case are not parties and I hesitate to
even call them "participants" but they have a role to play - document providers. In public access
a journalist or media organization may submit a request for info on a case or cases.  We know
these are not parties but are they "participants"? To summarize: I prefer the actor object which
may contain with it a person or organization objects with roles as party or participant or
something else. thanks,

Mohyeddin

"John M. Greacen" wrote:

> Dear colleagues:
>
> I have been in further discussions with Mark Kindl and John Wandelt at
> GTRI about the person object and possible ways to accommodate Court
> Filing's need for an element that accommodates persons, organizations
> and things.
>
> They have suggested that an actor object could be created which allowed
> the use of either the person, organization, or property object.  They
> have also
> suggested that this object might be more easily understood and accepted
> if it were called "party" rather than "actor."
>
> I attach a PowerPoint diagram of the possible "actor" element that we
> have been discussing.  I would appreciate getting your comments on it.
>
> Can anyone think of another instance -- other than party -- in which we
> need to be able to accept persons and organizations or persons,
> organizations and things?  It seems to me that witnesses are invariably
> individuals, even when they are testifying as agents or officers of an
> organization.  "Party" would seem to work for contracts as well as for
> court cases.  In sum, what do you think of the idea of "party" as the
> name of the object instead of "actor?"
>
> I look forward to your ideas and suggestions.
>
> --
> John M. Greacen
> Greacen Associates, LLC.
> 18 Fairly Road
> Santa Fe, NM  87507
> 505-471-0203
>
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                                Name: PersonType 21.ppt
>    PersonType 21.ppt           Type: Microsoft PowerPoint Show (application/vnd.ms-powerpoint)
>                            Encoding: BASE64
>                     Download Status: Not downloaded with message