RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Groups - Cardinality discussion 11-30-2015.do

Looks like some good discussions took place. Sorry I was not there.

Under “next steps” I see:

1. Define the purpose and strategic intent of the ECF specification

2. Establish element cardinality-setting rules, e.g., if there is no compelling justification to constrain an element, leave it unbounded

3. Identify the approach(es) to close the cardinality issue

For #2, our preference is what is stated in the example: “if there is no compelling justification to constrain an element, leave it unbounded”.

For #3, we favor moving forward with the 4.01 cardinality in general, but then applying the outcomes of #1 and #2 towards any new additions to ECF.

Finally, a related thought: ECF 4.01 Errata 01 contained some updates that were fairly impactful to us. Specifically, constraining EntityType to min=1 and max=1. I suspect this change brought the spec up to match what the original intent was, but it was pretty painful for us and our business partners. This was likely due to the way we were using ECF as we were new to it, but it was awfully impactful to us for a minor spec update. This leads me to pose the following: try to avoid cardinality changes in minor updates.

Philip

From: legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Jim Harris
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 1:56 PM
To: legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [legalxml-courtfiling] Groups - Cardinality discussion 11-30-2015.docx uploaded

Document Name: Cardinality discussion 11-30-2015.docx

Philip Baughman
Senior Development Manager, eSolutions
P: 972.713.3770 ext: 113406

Description
Notes from cardinality discussion on 30-Nov-2015.
Download Latest Revision
Public Download Link

Submitter: Mr. Jim Harris
Group: OASIS LegalXML Electronic Court Filing TC
Folder: Meeting Notes
Date submitted: 2015-11-30 11:55:31

legalxml-courtfiling message