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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

legalxml-comment message

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

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

Indeed he is (knowledgeable, I mean -- don't know if 
he's on any of these lists - and I'm still in S Africa 
representing ABA at the World Summit on Sustainable 
Development, writing from an internet cafe w/o access 
to my internet address book, so can't copy him)! As 
you may know, Jeff AResty valiantly serves (among the 
many other hats he nobly wears) as Vice Chair of the 
ABA Section on International Law & Practice Task Force 
on Cross-Cultural Negotiation, Dispute Resolution, and 
Virtual Legal Communication.

Jeff and I have developed and presented together and 
apart for the past 10 years numerous programs -- both 
through LPMS and SILP -- and also in other venues -- 
on the topic of cross-cultural traps for the unwary in 
international business communications.  

Identification of the cultural, linguistic and legal 
commonalities that would support the realization of a 
global (transnational) dispute resolution web is a 
timely project that would have great value not just to 
thyis ODR standards development project (to which it 
seems very important), but also in many other ways.


Ann L. MacNaughton

--- Original Message ---
From: jkeane <jik@jkeane.com>
odrXML - Starting Point?

>Jeff Aresty of the ABA-LPM eLawyering Task Force and 
International Law
>Section is a connoisseur of international ethics and 
online practice
>questions. Are you on any of these lists, Jeff?
>James I. Keane

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ann MacNaughton odrXML -
>Starting Point?
>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
>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
>Ann L. MacNaughton
>Sustainable Resolutions Inc.
>--- Original Message ---
>From: John Messing <jmessing@law-on-line.com>
>To: "'Ben Davis'" <bdavis@law.txwes.edu>, "'Rolly
>Chambers'" <rlchambers@smithcurrie.com>, legalxml-odr-
>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)"
>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
>>---------- 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
>>>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
>>>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
>>>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.
>>>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-
>>>Cc: Legalxml-Comment (E-mail); LegalXML (Mail) (E-
>>>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
>>>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
>>>  -----Original Message-----
>>>  From: jkeane [mailto:jik@jkeane.com]
>>>  Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 11:32 AM
>>>  To: 'Rolly Chambers'; legalxml-odr-
>>>  Cc: Legalxml-Comment (E-mail); LegalXML (Mail) (E-
>>>  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-
>>>  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 
>>>  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
>>>  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
>>>type="TransmissionMediaEnum" with a list of MIME
>types to distinguish
>>>between image formats, document formats, clear text
>>>  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, 
>>>   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
>>>  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
>>>  Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 10:47 AM
>>>  To: legalxml-odr-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org
>>>  Subject: [legalxml-odr-discuss] odrXML - Starting
>>>  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
>>>000118C. Additional and more general information
>about ODR is also available
>>>  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
>>>  Rolly Chambers
>>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the
>>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>Ann L. MacNaughton

Ann L. MacNaughton

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

Powered by eList eXpress LLC