RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] work product review ECF 4.0 Webservices SIP 2

Mary,

I believe this version addresses all of the issues except #1 – I would appreciate it if you could make those updates. Please let me know if there are any other issues.

Thanks,

Jim Cabral
MTG Management Consultants, L.L.C.
www.mtgmc.com
(206) 442-5010 Phone
(502) 640-4970 Mobile

Helping our clients make a difference in the lives of the people they serve.

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.

From: Mary McRae [mailto:mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org]
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 2:48 PM
To: legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org
Cc: Sabine Ocker
Subject: [legalxml-courtfiling] work product review ECF 4.0 Webservices SIP 2.01

The following issues have been idientified in the submitted work products and must be corrected before they can be uploaded to docs.oasis-open.org:

1. Specification URI:

Latest Version - these should be version-agnostic URIs that will always point to the latest iteration of the spec. For instance, on the previous version (2.0) the latest version uri for the html format is http://docs.oasis-open.org/legalxml-courtfiling/specs/ecf/v4.0/ecf-v4.0-webservices-spec/ecf-v4.0-webservices-v2.0-spec.html (note the missing cd01)

2. One of the three formats of the spec must be delared as authoritative.

3. Editors:

Roger Winters is no longer a member of the TC and his name should be listed

4. Contributors:

Contributors must be placed in an Appendix and are not listed on the cover of the spec.

5. Running Footer

is showing the spec id as v2.0 rather than v2.01

6. References

Citations to OASIS work are not in the proper format. See below

The proper format for a citation to an OASIS Technical Committee's work (whether Normative or Non-Normative) is:

OASIS
Stage (Committee Draft 01, Committee Draft 02, Committee Specifcation 01, etc. or Standard)
Title (italicized or in quotation marks)
Approval Date (Month YYYY)
URI of the actual Authoritative Specification (namespace is not acceptable as the content changes over time)

For example:

[EDXL-HAVE]

OASIS Standard, "Emergency Data Exchange Language (EDXL) Hospital AVailability Exchange (HAVE) Version 1.0", November 2008.
http://docs.oasis-open.org/emergency/edxl-have/os/emergency_edxl_have-1.0-spec-os.doc

7. There is no Conformance Section. (must be last-numbered section in the body of the document, immediately preceding any appendices)

8. The Acknowledgements section lists individuals who are not in the TC; their names must be removed. Also there are one or more associate members (identifiable by the fact that their company's name in the TC roster is not a hypertext link); they should be listed as "Associate" and are not entitled to have their company name displayed.

The TC can make the appropriate changes and resubmit the Committee Draft, or, as an alternative, OASIS Staff will make the necessary changes upon request to items 1-6, and 8. The TC itself will, however, need to add a Conformance section before any other updates can be made.

Regards,

Mary

Mary P McRae

Director, Standards Development

Technical Committee Administrator

OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society

email: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org

web: www.oasis-open.org

twitter: fiberartisan #oasisopen

phone: 1.603.232.9090

Standards are like parachutes: they work best when they're open.

legalxml-courtfiling message