courtfiling-reqts message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: RE: [courtfiling-reqts] Status, artifacts, issues
- From: "Cabral, James E." <JCabral@mtgmc.com>
- To: <scott@justiceintegration.com>,<courtfiling-reqts@lists.oasis-open.org>,<john@greacen.net>
- Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 21:45:33 -0700
Scott,
Thanks for all your work this week - truly above and beyond
the call. Here are my responses to the issues you
identified.
--Associations in Juvenile not mapped; I took a stab at
this (see more below)
I will
defer to John as the domain expert on the Juvenile issues.
--(Payment
mapping) Classes Branch and FinancialInstitution are mapped out in spreadsheet,
but do not appear in domain model...need to reconcile
We should add these to the domain model ala the UBL Payment model.
Do you want to or should I?
--CardAccount.accountOwnerAddress is in domain model, but not
mapped
Move accountOwnerAddress to FilerPayment, make it type cac:Address and
0,1.
--On
GetServiceInformationQuery...
--shouldn't
ServiceInformationResponseMessage have 1..* ServiceRecipients
--shouldn't each ServiceRecipient have either an Organization or
Person?
--if so, then can we use the abstract class technique used
elsewhere (e.g., case type-specific stuff) to model this, and map to a schema
choice compositor?
I wouldn't make any changes at this point. ServiceRecipients only
apply to Electronic service so it is an optional property of Organization
or Person, not the other way around.
--We need UBL
schemas
I'll create the UBL
schemas when we lock down the domain model and
mappings.
jim
As you've all seen, I just posted a new baseline of the domain model
and mapping to the main TC KAVI area.
The consolidation work and cleanup
raised a number of issues, in the attached. Also attached is a list of changes
that were made to the criminal and traffic models, to improve consistency and
reuse of structures across the message models. (John and I had a conversation
about this yesterday and decided some refactoring would be worth the effort.) I
have saved baselines along the way, so none of the changes are set in stone. I
believe they do make the models (and mappings) clearer, more consistent, and
less error-prone.
Our biggest remaining gaps are:
* Finishing up
the juvenile model and mapping (still some gaps there...Jim, I have highlighted
some issues for you in the attached issues file, at the top)
* Modeling and
mapping GetCaseQuery
* Domain expert review of the consolidated models and
all of the mappings (esp criminal, traffic, and juvenile)
I have not
begun creating schemas. I've flat run out of time this weekend, and also do not
want to spend time on them if there are additional changes to the mappings. I
would guess it will take 6-8 hours to create the schemas from the
mappings.
I also agreed with John that I would produce a short (1-2 page)
description of the ECF 3.0 architecture, for inclusion in the IEPD overview
document. Look for that mid-week.
Thanks
everyone.
--Scott
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]