Re: [legalxml-comment] RE: [legalxml-odr-discuss] odrXML - StartingPoint?

[Ann MacNaughton <A.MACNAUGHTON_BRUNE@sbcglobal.net>]

I have been following this thread with great interest. 
This is an excellent suggestion: "identification of 
the cultural, linguistic and legal commonalities which 
support the realization of a global (transnational) 
dispute resolution web."

In the ABA Section on International Law & Practice, I 
chair the Task Force on Cross-Cultural Negotiation, 
Dispute Resolution, and Virtual Legal Communication. I 
work in the area of cross-cultural dispute resolution, 
and am not familiar with any existing work that would 
fit neatly into this context. Is anyone? If 
anyone "out there" on the lists woven into this 
discussion is interested in tackling the topic, I 
would be glad to recruit Task Force volunteers to 
assist.

Meanwhile, Ben, you may want to consider some 
attention to the North-South "digital divide" 
sensitivities. I am in Johannesburg, representing the 
ABA at the World Summit on Sustainable Development, 
and have myself a much greater appreciation for the 
significance of this issue to the effective use of e-
systems for various dispute resolution applications, 
especially if the disputes engage North-South 
disputants. I'm not sure when I will next be in 
Houston, but would like to brainstorm about these 
issues with you at some length -- any chance you may 
be in Houston in September? Or can you possibly 
participate with us on the "Mediating Across Cultures" 
make-up class, which last I heard was at UHLC in early 
October?

Ann

Ann L. MacNaughton
Sustainable Resolutions Inc.
a.macnaughton_brune@sbcglobal.net

Ann


--- Original Message ---
From: John Messing <jmessing@law-on-line.com>
To: "'Ben Davis'" <bdavis@law.txwes.edu>, "'Rolly 
Chambers'" <rlchambers@smithcurrie.com>, legalxml-odr-
discuss@lists.oasis-open.org, 
ICArbitration@yahoogroups.com, jkeane <jik@jkeane.com>
CC: "'Legalxml-Comment (E-mail)'" <legalxml-
comment@lists.oasis-open.org>, "'LegalXML (Mail) (E-
mail)'" <legal_xml@yahoo.com>, "ABA-ODR List (E-mail)" 
<ADR@MAIL.ABANET.ORG>, "Daniel Greenwood (E-mail)" 
<dan@civics.com>, "Jamie Bryce (E-mail)" 
<jbc@lawyer.com>
Subject: Re: [legalxml-comment] RE: [legalxml-odr-
discuss] odrXML - Starting Point?

>I am not sure where one would find a compendium of 
technical efforts since there has been an explosion of 
XML standards and your question seems to extend beyond 
even XML itself. If I come across such a listing or 
group of listings, I will make an effort to send them 
to you in a private email.
>
>What might add another dimension to your work is an 
identification of the cultural, linguistic and legal 
commonalities which support the realization of a 
global (transnational) dispute resolution web. These 
common features, if properly identified and 
classified, could help establish a basis for XML 
standards which, as a practical matter, could also 
help bring about or accelerate efforts towards 
transnational dispute resolution. I think such an 
identification of common factors is related to the 
question which Rolly Chambers first posed.
>
>I look forward to reviewing your article.
>
>Best regards.
>
>John Messing
>Chair, E-Filing Committee
>Science and Technology Section
>American Bar Association
>
>
>Chair, eNotary TC
>LegalXML-Oasis
>
>---------- Original Message --------------------------
--------
>From: jkeane <jik@jkeane.com>
>Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2002 18:00:34 -0400
>
>>Ben, thanks for query and interest in solving this 
data model issue
>>globally.
>>There is an engaging discussion on the CourtFiling 
list right now on a
>>discrepancy between the use of Actor and Person and 
the different roles they
>>play in any legal proceeding. It turns out Criminal 
Justice Data Dictionary
>>is not using the same terms and approaches it a bit 
differently.
>>
>>Just within LegalXML and OASIS space, is there a 
comparable set of
>>relationships in ebXML work?  The central point of 
my thesis is that we
>>should be able to move seamlessly from a legal 
transaction to dispute
>>resolution, whether by ADR, Civil or Criminal 
process.
>>
>>Ben, are you in touch with anyone in Singapore who 
can join the dialogue?
>>They certainly have been very active in electronic 
courts and ADR.
>>
>>Jim
>>
>>PS.  I added the ABA ODR list  to this thread. in. 
What's the nature of the
>>ICArbitration yahoo group?
>>James I. Keane JKeane.Law.Pro
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Ben Davis [mailto:bdavis@law.txwes.edu]
>>Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 4:40 PM
>>To: 'jkeane'; 'Rolly Chambers'; legalxml-odr-
discuss@lists.oasis-open.org;
>>'ICArbitration@yahoogroups.com'
>>Cc: Legalxml-Comment (E-mail); LegalXML (Mail) (E-
mail)
>>Subject: RE: [legalxml-odr-discuss] odrXML - 
Starting Point?
>>This is a very interesting note suggesting cross-
overs at this time.  I
>>wonder if the technical efforts in Singapore Courts 
would be relevant to
>>this.  I also wonder if anyone is aware of a place 
where there is a list of
>>the various types of technical efforts like these 
that are or may be going
>>on in the four corners of the world.  I am writing 
an article tentatively
>>titled "Connecting Worldwide: The Seamless Dispute 
Resolution Web" and this
>>type of development in various corners of the world 
is part of what I am
>>looking at and thinking about in addition to legal 
developments.
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Ben Davis
>>Benjamin Davis
>>Associate Professor
>>Texas Wesleyan University School of Law
>>1515 Commerce Street
>>Fort Worth, Texas 76102
>>Tel.: 1 817 212 3915
>>Fax: 1 817 212 3965
>>E-mail:bdavis@law.txwes.edu
>>  -----Original Message-----
>>  From: jkeane [mailto:jik@jkeane.com]
>>  Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 11:32 AM
>>  To: 'Rolly Chambers'; legalxml-odr-
discuss@lists.oasis-open.org
>>  Cc: Legalxml-Comment (E-mail); LegalXML (Mail) (E-
mail)
>>  Subject: RE: [legalxml-odr-discuss] odrXML - 
Starting Point?
>>
>>
>>  Rolly Chambers (who is now co-chairing the eFiling 
committee of the ABA
>>Science & Technology Section with fellow LegalXML 
stalwart, John Messing)
>>asked if anyone was familiar enough the  OdrXML 
draft standard 1.0 to
>>determine if that work was a good starting place for 
this proposed OdrXML
>>Technical Committee.
>>
>>  I'm cross posting this response to the general 
list as we all need to
>>become aware of this important effort in Europe. We 
also need to look at the
>>methodology and work product of some XML devotees 
who have been working in
>>parallel with us but without any apparent cross-
overs.
>>
>>  After studying their data model and scheme, let me 
offer some observations
>>from my notes - which are a work in progress.   I'm 
am in no way making
>>judgments about the extensive and thoughtful work 
already done by the Joint
>>Research Centre Online Dispute Resolution 
Workgroup "in Association with the
>>European Commission." Indeed, it's very impressive 
and state of the art.  It
>>is very different, however, from the path that Legal 
XML and particularly
>>the CourtFiling TC with its equally impressive work 
on its DTD's and
>>policies to date as well as its plans to migrate to 
a schema in release 2.0.
>>
>>  Our Integrated Justice Technical Committee has 
taken a more parallel tack
>>to OdrXML, in that the folks at SEARCH and at 
Georgia Tech Research
>>Institute are developing a data model, data 
dictionary and a schema in
>>parallel with work on specific document types such 
as arrest reports,
>>warrants, charging documents and 
sentence/disposition documents through the
>>life cycle of a criminal matter.
>>
>>  Please take my preliminary comments then as 
comparative observations and
>>questions on how we can harmonize this very 
important work out of Europe
>>with the efforts of Legal XML / OASIS and LEXML for 
global standards.
>>
>>  JK Notes on OdrXML V.1.0 --  2002.08.27
>>
>>  1. OdrXML 1.0 uses a Schema rather than a Document 
Type Definition.  They
>>have included very helpful relationship diagrams in 
their documentation,
>>although the link to the demonstration did not work 
when I checked it last.
>>This whole approach is a step ahead of some of the 
work in progress by the
>>Court Filing TC which is planning to move to a 
schema. It parallels the
>>Integrated Justice TC's current work on a Data Model.
>>
>>  2. We all need to look carefully at the OdrXML 
data model to consider
>>using this approach as our development framework.  
Several IT folks in the
>>various Legal XML workgroups have strongly advocated 
this approach rather
>>than just building stand-alone DTD's and Schema for 
individual documents and
>>waiting for a horizontal workgroup to reconcile 
differences.
>>
>>  3. The OdrXML data model is case-centric. It 
describes a case rather than
>>a document (a related attribute of a document in the 
model) -- or a
>>court-filing envelope.  This is a different approach 
than we have used, but
>>we need some reactions from  from the data modeling 
experts at Georgia Tech
>>Research Institute and others to assess the OdrXML 
model and how we can
>>merge, converge, build on their work or unravel some 
of the choices each of
>>us have made in taking divergent paths towards the 
similar goals.
>>
>>  4. The ODR XML data model and schema includes an 
interesting transmission
>>element. A document can include: "xsd:element 
name='transmissionMedia"
>>type="TransmissionMediaEnum" with a list of MIME 
types to distinguish
>>between image formats, document formats, clear text 
etc".
>>
>>  The Legal XML Court Filing Group has had a robust 
debate on keeping a
>>clear separation between the transmission envelope 
and the underlying
>>document.  The ODR XML model needs clarification to 
determine if considers
>>making transmission an underlying component in a 
Case or document [or a
>>separate envelope which could transmit a bundle of 
documents and exhibits.]
>>The semantics on this point get even more 
interesting with their definition
>>of a "case" as "the overall envelope for all 
information in a dispute."
>>Given the meaning of the "envelope" concept in Court 
Filing, we need to find
>>a mutually agreeable alternative term such as 
a "container." More
>>importantly we need to compare and reconcile our 
data models.
>>
>>  5. The primary players or actors in the OdrXML 
data model are Parties
>>(Claimant, Respondent), Moderator (Case Officer, 
Mediator, Arbitrator) and
>>Specialist (Witness, Translator, Expert).  Based on 
some recent work in
>>developing a virtual dispute resolution platform 
with VirtualCourthouse, we
>>used a more encompassing term "Neutral, " which was 
strongly suggested by a
>>number of US ADR providers.
>>
>>  Our development team also made further 
distinctions between types of
>>Cases. We added "Neutral Case Evaluation" 
and "Settlement Conference," for
>>example.  The concept of a facilitated settlement 
conference with the
>>neutral being more proactive than a mediator becomes 
quite pointed when we
>>realized that a judges in Chambers acts as neutral 
too.  In addition, at
>>least in the US, many courts have mandatory ADR with 
a judge or court clerk
>>who refers cases, monitors them and may receive 
status reports.  Any overall
>>model may need more players, actors or "Personas" 
the terms used in the
>>OdrXML model.
>>
>>  The OdrXML model is very understandably focused on 
European Community type
>>eCommece disputes. As we delve deeper into this 
work,  we need to generalize
>>the data model to be more inclusive of other types 
of disputes such as
>>domestic relations, AAA, securities arbitration, etc.
>>
>>   Looking at this whole data model afresh, makes me 
want to visit an even
>>broader data model that follows commercial 
transactions through their full
>>life cycle from bid, offer, contract, performance, 
dispute, litigation.  The
>>Integrated Justice folks have addressed more 
document types in the life
>>cycle of an incident, an arrest, a warrant, a 
charging document and sentence
>>disposition.  The missing element that the OdrXML 
data model raises in a
>>"case."  That gets us into law firm, agency and 
court Case Management
>>Systems.
>>
>>  The great American Naturalist John Muir has 
observed:"Whenever I pick up a
>>small piece of nature, I find it is connected to the 
rest of the universe."
>>The work on OdrXML reflects a part of the life cycle 
of legal matters. In
>>part response to Rolly's question then, this is a 
good place to begin,
>>particularly if we connect it "to the rest of the 
universe" and parallel
>>work by other LegalXML TC's.
>>
>>  My compliments to the Joint Research Center for 
their clarifying work.
>>
>>  And to all, please join the OdrXML TC or or other 
TC's so we can connect
>>with the rest of the global XML community.
>>
>>  Jim Keane
>>  ViceChair
>>  LegalXML/Oasis Steering Committee
>>
>>   JKeane.Law.Pro
>>  <Litigation Systems>
>>  North Potomac Maryland USA
>>  301-948-4062 F: 301-947-9159
>>         www.jkeane.com
>>
>>
>>
>>  -----Original Message-----
>>  From: Rolly Chambers 
[mailto:rlchambers@smithcurrie.com]
>>  Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 10:47 AM
>>  To: legalxml-odr-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org
>>  Subject: [legalxml-odr-discuss] odrXML - Starting 
Point?
>>
>>
>>  From Karl Best's initial message creating this 
discussion list, I realize
>>the scope is "to explore the formation of an Online 
Dispute Resolution
>>Technical Committee" - something I'm in favor of and 
am willing to join in
>>as a TC member.
>>
>>  I also understand from Karl's message that the 
idea is for an ODR TC (if
>>formed) to "build from relevant work done previously 
by the Joint Research
>>Centre Online Dispute Resolution Workgroup in 
association with the European
>>Commission." An OdrXML draft standard ( Version 
0.1 )  is available at
>>http://econfidence.jrc.it/default/show.gx?
Object.object_id=EC_FORUM000000000
>>000118C. Additional and more general information 
about ODR is also available
>>at
>>http://econfidence.jrc.it/default/show.gx?
Object.object_id=EC_FORUM000000000
>>000000D.
>>
>>  Is anyone familiar enough with the OdrXML draft 
standard 0.1 to have a
>>view whether it would be an appropriate starting 
point for an ODR TC to
>>build from? I've looked at the OdrXML 0.1 draft 
standard, but haven't
>>studied it. I certainly don't have any opinion 
whether it would be a good
>>starting point for an ODR TC. I'm interested to hear 
what views others may
>>have.
>>
>>  Rolly Chambers
>>
>>
>
>------------------------------------------------------
----------
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the 
subscription
>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>

Ann L. MacNaughton
a.macnaughton_brune@sbcglobal.net