RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Maricopa County issues

Sorry.

MTOM: Message Transmission Optimization Mechanism http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-mtom/

XOP: XML-binary Optimized Packaging http://www.w3.org/TR/xop10/

Michael Robinson

From: Winters, Roger [mailto:Roger.Winters@METROKC.GOV]
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 2:20 PM
To: legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Maricopa County issues

It is most helpful when people spell out acronyms. Even then, I and other "non-techs" may not be able to understand, but there may be instances where we do have something to contribute about a technical subject with business process consequences.

I was able to find that XOP stands for "XML-binary Optimized Packaging" thanks to GuruNet and STANDS4.com, an ACRONYM service on the Web. MTOM Is not mentioned there.

Thanks!

Roger

Roger Winters

Program and Project Manager

King County Department of Judicial Administration

516 Third Avenue, E-609 MS: KCC-JA-0609

Seattle, Washington 98104

V: (206) 296-7838 F: (206) 296-0906

roger.winters@metrokc.gov

From: Michael Robinson [mailto:robinsom@gaaoc.us]
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 5:53 AM
To: legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Maricopa County issues

If they need to POST more than 10MB of data then they should configure their application/web server to handle this. I agree that it may be an obstacle during implementation but IMHO is out of scope and could be best located in some sort of user's FAQ. I believe that the web services message profile needs to be updated to include MTOM and XOP as I found no mention of either of these in the documentation (if I missed it I apologize).

6. Altova XMLSpy

From: Cabral, James E. [mailto:JCabral@mtgmc.com]
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 1:18 AM
To: legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [legalxml-courtfiling] Maricopa County issues

ECF TC:

Here are several issues/questions Maricopa County has raised regarding the ECF 3.0 specification.

Technical Questions

1. Currently, we provide metadata for splitting an attached document into parts/chunks in order to keep each part under a maximum attachment size. However, in the web service messaging profile, each of these attachments are still part of the same SOAP message and thus must be recombined at the receiving web server into a single HTTP POST. According to Maricopa, most web servers (e.g. ASP.NET, Apache, etc.) default at a maximum POST size of 10MB. Although the maximum POST size can usually be changed in the web server configuration, this could be an obstacle to implementation and also could raise issues in performance, etc. In any case, it seems like our metadata for splitting a document into parts are not working as intended. The question is whether should try to fix this in a future version of the web services message profile, or whether we should simply recommend that implementers increase the maximum POST size in their web server configurations?

2. Currently, we can query for filings or cases by case # or date. Should we also be able to query based on filing assembly MDE ( vendor) or filing status?

3. Can we add an indicator to the machine-readable court policy to indicate whether filings with multiple lead documents are supported?

4. How could ECF 3.0 be used or extended to support Judge Review and approval of documents, draft orders, etc.?

Other Questions

5. Once the TC defines a conformance testing process, is there a source of funds available for writing ECF conformance testing tools? Maricopa has developers who may be interested in writing the testing tools.

6. Is anyone aware of any code generator that can generate C# code templates for a given schema?
.
Jim Cabral

James E. Cabral Jr.
MTG Management Consultants, L.L.C.
1111 Third Avenue, Suite 2700
Seattle, WA 98101-3201
(206) 442-5010
www.mtgmc.com

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely
for the use of the entity or individual(s) to whom they are
addressed and not for reliance upon by unintended recipients. If
you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for
delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient be advised that you
have received this e-mail in error and that any use, dissemination,
forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail and any files
transmitted are strictly prohibited. If you have received this
e-mail in error please delete the entire email and immediately
notify us by email to the sender or by telephone to the AOC main
office number, (404) 656-5171. Thank you.

legalxml-courtfiling message