OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

courtfiling-cert message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: RE: [courtfiling-cert] Court Filing 1.1 vendor compliance proposal

Title: Message
I agree with the suggested approach, with the addition that if the "comments in reaction" that the TC posts are clearly in opposition to the claims of the vendor, that the vendor not be permitted to make such claims.  This is not saying that the TC would officially approve the claim, for the reason described below.  But, somehow there should be a mechanism so that the act of reporting to the TC and allowing the TC to post comments does not result in a vendor whose implementation clearly has made major modifications to a Court Filing 1.1 standard that were not needed or justified in the the opinion of TC members does not still get to make claims regarding Court Filing 1.1 implementation.  I believe active TC members who have Court Filing 1.1 implementations would be able to meet this criteria.
Catherine Krause
E-Filing Project Manager
King County Department of Judicial Administration
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom.Clarke@courts.wa.gov [mailto:Tom.Clarke@courts.wa.gov]
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2003 11:57 AM
To: courtfiling-cert@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [courtfiling-cert] Court Filing 1.1 vendor compliance proposal

Subcommittee members,


The TC is proposing that vendors may claim to have implemented the Court Filing 1.1 standard if they report to the TC how they implemented the standard and permit the TC to post comments in reaction.  The TC will not officially approve or disapprove the claim, based on arguments of technical correctness, since the 1.1 standard is too vague and incomplete to enforce that approach.


Given the proposal of this subcommittee for certification, that stance is appropriate,.  Nothing short of an open source reference implementation and a formal test suite is sufficient to claim formal compliance, if the philosophy of our proposed certification requirements is adopted.  That position implies a non-ambiguous and functionally complete (or formally segmented) set of standards that enables the test suite to produce a clear yes-or-no result.


John Greacen has asked for our feedback on this issue prior to the TC conference call next Tuesday.  Please respond before then if possible and I will try to fairly summarize the comments for the TC.  Thanks.


Tom Clarke


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]