Re: [legalxml-courtfiling] Implementation Reports

["Dallas Powell" <dpowell@tybera.com>]

I think that Shanes comments reflect my position as well.

Dallas

----- Original Message -----
From: <Shane.Durham@lexisnexis.com>
To: <legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 11:01 AM
Subject: [legalxml-courtfiling] Implementation Reports


> >>  Dallas writes:
> Also, for a report to be a recognized "report" or "addendum" the
> modifications must be presented to the TC and reviewed to insure that the
> intent has not extended the standard into areas that we do not agree with.
> <<
>
> I concur that the implementor's report needs to be reviewed by LegalXML.
>
> However, I don't think that LegalXML should assign some kind of explicit
> 'approved' or 'rejected' status, or assign some grade to each
> implementation.  The LegalXML standard is far too ambiguous for our group
to
> say that implementor 'A' is doing it the right way and implementor 'B' is
> doing it the wrong way.
>
> I think it would be appropriate, for the group, as a whole, to post the
> comments generated by the implementation report's review.  The implementor
> and LegalXML should continue to exchange comments, until they have
satisfied
> each other's curiosity (or patience!).
>
> The implementor's report and all comments should be made available to the
> public.  In that way, LegalXML and the implementor can publicly indicate
> where the implementation might "severely differ" from an "anticipated" use
> of the standard. (Still, that would not mean the implementation is
'wrong'.)
>
> At that point, LegalXML can say that the report-and-review process is
done.
>
> Having implemented the LegalXML CourtFiling, and/or Document, and/or
> QueryResponse standard, and participated in this official
report-and-review
> process (including a posted version of the implementor's DTD/Schema), I
> beleive an implementor should be able to claim (LegaXML should post) that
> they are "a recognized implementation of LegalXML
> CourtFiling/Document/QueryResponse, as defined by LegalXML addendum
document
> yadda-yadda....".
>
> All in all, I would expect the process to be an easy one for an
implementor
> to follow. Simply, show us what you did with LegalXML - we'll tell you
what
> we think about it.  Everyone gets to see our conversation.  And.. that's
it.
> - Shane
>