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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

legalxml-courtfiling message

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


Subject: Summary of March 2 conference call


This is my formulation of the resolution to the terminology issues discussed on today’s conference call.  Please let me know if you wish a change to my wording to be more technically precise in recording the resolution.

 

I thank all who participated and contributed to the discussion.  It was worthwhile and increased everyone’s understanding.

 

Inclusion of terms describing the aggregation of interfaces in the use cases.  All are in agreement with James Cusick that the technically correct process for developing use cases does not include this sort of aggregation, and that the development of a reference architecture should follow the completion of the use cases.  However, James became convinced during the discussion that we are, in effect, combining the two processes in our development of the requirements documentation – partly because of the real world experience that convinces all of us who have worked in the domain of the need for these aggregations and the pressure of time which does not allow us to conduct the analysis in two stages.  Shane and Eric agreed to include high level use cases, with appropriate graphics, showing the relationships among the detailed use cases and the aggregation terms used in them.  All are in agreement that the aggregations will not be require any implementer to build software or assemble components in any pre-determined way.

 

Level of granularity of aggregations.  The consensus is to continue to refer to three basic aggregations, with the understanding that Eric and Shane may find it necessary to add to one of them, or to add a fourth or even fifth aggregation, to address the needs for “secondary” service and court filing policy.

 

Descriptive term for such aggregations.  We will use the term Major Design Elements (or MDEs) rather than Components.

 

Terms for basic MDEs.  We will use Filing Assembly MDE (or, perhaps, Filing and Service Assembly MDE), Filing Review MDE, and Court Record MDE, or some variation of those basic terms that Eric and Shane may suggest when they post the revised use cases.

 

The issues have been resolved and there is no need for a KAVI vote to determine the TC’s will on the issue or to confirm these decisions.

 

John M. Greacen

Greacen Associates, LLC

HCR 78, Box 23

Regina, New Mexico 87046

505-289-2164

505-289-2163 (fax)

505-780-1450 (cell)

 



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