Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 11:57
AM
Subject: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling]
Feedback Request/Request to Continue W ork of Documents Subcommittee
John,
I've no doubt that it would be a hard sell for many people,
not just judges, to go to paragraph numbering as a method of citations. That
is part of the reason that idea hasn't moved very far very fast in the several
years since I first heard it mentioned.
I am always on the lookout for a "BOTH/AND" solution to a
problem, rather than "EITHER/OR." I think it will be important for us to
continue to recognize the importance of physical appearance and structure of
legal documents for most users--we must continue to press to perfect the
science and art of displaying electronic documents using XML. I don't see that
ever going away - people want the reassurance they are looking at the same
thing, that we are "on the same page," as we know.
Perhaps the proposal for paragraph IDs is best made as an
ADDITIONAL method that can be employed in support of citing information in
electronic documents. Where the formatting tools don't work correctly, the IDs
can come to the rescue? I think the usefulness of this method would have to
rest in large part on its being effortless - that is, people should not
consciously have to count the paragraphs in the documents they create - that
should be done automatically, employing a standard method.
Roger
Roger Winters
King County
Department of Judicial Administration
Continuing Legal Education (CLE) Coordinator
and
Programs and Projects Manager
516 Third Avenue, E-609 MS: KCC-JA-0609
Seattle, Washington 98104
V: (206) 296-7838 F:
(206) 296-0906
roger.winters@metrokc.gov
-----Original Message-----
From: John
Messing [mailto:jmessing@law-on-line.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 10:05 AM
To: Winters, Roger
Cc:
legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org; 'Rex McElrath'; 'Bergeron,Donald L.
(LNG-DAY)'; 'Dallas Powell'
Subject: RE:
[legalxml-courtfiling] Feedback Request/Request to Continue W ork of Documents
Subcommittee
Good luck telling that to judges who are busy in the courtroom
and are
used to page breaks during oral argument with
line references, not
paragraphs, in my
experience.
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Feedback Request/Request
to
> Continue W ork of Documents
Subcommittee
> From: "Winters, Roger"
<Roger.Winters@METROKC.GOV>
> Date: Wed,
August 17, 2005 8:36 am
> To: "'Bergeron, Donald L.
(LNG-DAY)'" <Donald.Bergeron@lexisnexis.com>,
> 'Dallas Powell' <dpowell@tybera.com>, John
Messing
> <jmessing@law-on-line.com>
> Cc: legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org, 'Rex
McElrath'
> <mcelratr@gaaoc.us>
>
> RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Feedback
Request/Request to Continue W ork of Documents Subcommittee
>
> I am someone who's
formatted and set up a zillion documents intended for others to receive
electronically and display on their own equipment, and, from my perspective,
paragraph IDs have a great deal of appeal for referencing purposes. Some other
points about using paragraph IDs as reference points:
>
> Even though it is the
intention of the author of a document that lines consistently break at the
same word, that page breaks occur exactly for everyone, and that line
numbering be as predictable as Chapter and Verse in scriptures, it is fallible
word processors who set up the actual pages.
>
> Inserted graphics, printing
with "squeeze" or "shrink" features on (resulting in fonts that are
fractional, e.g., 9.5), having different fonts sharing the same name, printers
with different capabilities, and so on -- all such things can prevent
documents being exactly the same when displayed by different people on
different equipment.
>
> Let's also remember the
person with a visual impairment who may need to display a document with a
larger font. The person may not have access to equipment to magnify the image
of the document, keeping it in its original, smaller font, in order to
preserve line numbering, etc. A paragraph that is displayed in a much
larger font (or that has been translated to a different language!) would carry
with it the same paragraph ID no matter what is being done by the recipient
when viewing the document.
>
> Roger Winters
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bergeron, Donald L. (LNG-DAY) [mailto:Donald.Bergeron@lexisnexis.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 10:48 AM
> To: 'Dallas Powell'; John Messing; Winters, Roger
> Cc: legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org;
'Rex McElrath'
> Subject: RE:
[legalxml-courtfiling] Feedback Request/Request to Continue W ork of Documents
Subcommittee
>
> I
second Dallas's comment. Paragraphs are often the basis for public domain
> citations for the same reasons.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Don
>
> Donald L. Bergeron
> Systems Designer
>
LexisNexis
> donald.bergeron@lexisnexis.com
> O 937-865-1276
> H
937-748-2775
> M 937-672-7781
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
Dallas Powell [mailto:dpowell@tybera.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 1:31 PM
> To: John Messing; Winters,Roger
> Cc: legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org; 'Rex McElrath'
> Subject: Re: [legalxml-courtfiling] Feedback
Request/Request to Continue W
> ork of Documents
Subcommittee
>
>
PDF and XSLT do not include the functions of a formatter. It is the
> formatter that paginates, line wraps, and
determines spacing based on font
> faces, font
sizes, kerning, and line space settings not XSLT or PDF.
>
> Within XSLT you
could insert a page marker based on some element and a givin
> condition of that element, but, it is the formatter that keeps
track of the
> line lengths, spacing, wrapping,
margins, and pagination that make the
> proper
insert. The elements (tags) alone do not provide adequate
> information to make those types of
decisions.
>
>
That is a motivating factor behind going to paragraphs. Paragraphs can
> contextually be marked with elements, giving ID
and IDrefs, which provides a
> markup based
reference rather than a formatted based reference.
>
> Dallas
>
>
>
----- Original Message -----
> From: "John
Messing" <jmessing@law-on-line.com>
> To:
"Winters,Roger" <Roger.Winters@METROKC.GOV>
>
Cc: <legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org>; "'Rex McElrath'"
> <mcelratr@gaaoc.us>
> Sent: Monday, August 08, 2005 5:28 PM
>
Subject: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Feedback Request/Request to Continue W
> ork of Documents Subcommittee
>
>
> > I haven't found any statistics on the
subject but from my experience
> > anecdotally,
I think lawyers and judges still refer to page and line of
> > a document. Only PDF supports doing that electronically in my
own
> > experience, but fortunately PDF
documents can be generated directly
> > using
XSLT from XML documents.
> >
> >
> >
> > > -------- Original Message --------
> > > Subject: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Feedback
Request/Request to
> > > Continue W ork
of Documents Subcommittee
> > > From:
"Winters, Roger" <Roger.Winters@METROKC.GOV>
> > > Date: Mon, August 08, 2005 4:11 pm
> > > To: 'John Messing' <jmessing@law-on-line.com>
> > > Cc:
legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org, 'Rex McElrath'
> > > <mcelratr@gaaoc.us>
>
> >
> > >
RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Feedback Request/Request to Continue W
> ork of Documents Subcommittee
> > >
> > > I appreciate the
concern over everyone literally "being on the same
> page" when viewing electronic court documents, since precise
references are
> quite important. Years ago, there
was some discussion, perhaps at a
> theoretical
level only, of using techni
> > ques like
paragraph numbering as an alternative to referencing page and
> line numbers. Is anyone aware of whether that idea or anything
like it has
> ever caught on with anyone as an
approach to the reference problem?
> > >
> > > Roger Winters
> > > King County
> > >
Department of Judicial Administration
> > >
Continuing Legal Education (CLE) Coordinator
> >
> and
> > > Programs and Projects Manager
> > > 516 Third Avenue, E-609 MS: KCC-JA-0609
> > > Seattle, Washington 98104
> > > V: (206) 296-7838 F: (206) 296-0906
> > > roger.winters@metrokc.gov
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: John Messing [mailto:jmessing@law-on-line.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, August 08, 2005 3:39 PM
> > > To: Winters, Roger
> > > Cc: legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org; 'Rex
McElrath'
> > > Subject: RE:
[legalxml-courtfiling] Feedback Request/Request to Continue
> W ork of Documents Subcommittee
> >
>
> > > One of the transforms that could
be envisioned uses XSLT-FO to output
> > >
PDF binary files directly from the XML of a court document constructed
> > > around the input messaging parameters.
An advantage of this approach is
> > >
pagination. One limitation of other human viewer methods, such as XML,
> > > HTML or even RTF (i.e., viewable in
Word or Wordperfect) is that screen
> > >
resolution will affect pagination. In a courtroom environment, it will
> > > become intolerable for an advocate to
have information on one page
> > > while the
same information on the court's screen will be found on a
> > > different page. PDF output prevents that result by
having pagination
> > > the same on all
machines.
> > >
>
> > My 2 cents.
> > >
> > > John Messing
> > >
> > >
> > >
> -------- Original Message --------
>
> > > Subject: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Feedback Request/Request to
> > > > Continue W ork of Documents
Subcommittee
> > > > From: "Winters,
Roger" <Roger.Winters@METROKC.GOV>
> >
> > Date: Mon, August 08, 2005 3:18 pm
> >
> > To: 'Rex McElrath' <mcelratr@gaaoc.us>
> > > > Cc: legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > >
> >
> > RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Feedback
Request/Request to Continue
> Work of Documents
Subcommittee
> > > >
> > > > Hello, Rex,
> > >
>
> > > > I'm glad you've taken
initiative with this proposal. I realize there
> is
much involved with which I am unfamiliar, but it seems this is exactly
> the work that should be done to help realize a
long-standing goal, at least
> for some of the
court clerks w
> > ho got involved with LegalXML
early on.
> > >
>
> > >
> > > > Perhaps you or
others can guide me in finding some introductory
>
material for the less technically adept people, explaining some of the
> subject matter with which we may be unfamiliar,
specifically:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > In your
modernization of my formula to "GJXDM -> Information Exchange
> Package + XSL Style Sheet and/or XSL Transform
and/or XSL Formatting Objects
> = Human-Readable
Document" - I have a high level familiarity with GJXDM, but
> not with IEPs or XSL Form
> > atting
Objects. I have a high level understanding only of the other
> elements (XSL Style Sheets and XSL Transform).
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I understand that part of the
motivation is that in some e-filing
>
implementations there are essentially two different documents involved
> submitted: a human-readable (e.g., PDF) and a
data file for processing. This
> apparently creates
a situation wher
> > e it is a problem that the
two might not be an exact match. While I agree
>
this work should help solve that problem, I would think that the "norm" for
> e-filing would be a single document that includes
all marked up data
> elements and whatever is
required
> > to present the document in
human-readable form (e.g., appropriate style
>
sheet), plus (of course) everything else relating to signatures, security,
> etc.
> > >
> > > >
> >
> > You mention a deliverable in September, "a draft of a methodology to
> reproduce for other documents and refinement and
expansion of the
> functionality of the methods
used to create the first document package" - I
>
think that directions in plain languag
> > e
will be among the most valuable items this project might produce. I'd
> like to use my writing and editing skills to help
develop such
> materials--but I have to understand
the subject matter first. Ultimately,
> the process
has to be something easily expla
> > ined to
non-technical people.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
again for getting this started.
> > > >
> > > > Roger
>
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Roger Winters
> >
> > King County
> > > > Department
of Judicial Administration
> > > >
Continuing Legal Education (CLE) Coordinator
> >
> > and
> > > > Programs and
Projects Manager
> > > > 516 Third Avenue,
E-609 MS: KCC-JA-0609
> > > > Seattle,
Washington 98104
> > > > V: (206) 296-7838
F: (206) 296-0906
> > > >
roger.winters@metrokc.gov
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > From: Rex McElrath [mailto:mcelratr@gaaoc.us]
> > > > Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 1:45 PM
> > > > To:
legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org
> >
> > Subject: [legalxml-courtfiling] Feedback Request/Request to Continue
> Work of Documents Subcommittee
> > > >
> > > >
Feedback Request/Request to Continue Work of Documents Subcommittee
> > > >
> >
> >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > I've
talked with the Chairs of this TC and some of the members about
> reviving the Documents Subcommittee and am
submitting this email to the full
> TC in request
of feedback and as a motion to continue the work of the
> Documents Subcommittee.
> > >
> > > >
> >
> > I have been researching the work by Dr. Leff, work done on the Rap
> Sheet, the current Court Documents specification,
and other related work for
> reference material and
believe the existing goals of the Documents
>
Subcommittee are possible for use with
> >
the new Information Exchange Packages (IEP's) promoted by GJXDM
> Guidelines with the XML transform and stylizing
technology that is available
> today.
> > >
> > >
>
> > > > The concept of the electronic
documents from early on in LegalXML was,
> as Roger
Winters explained it:
> > > >
> > > > (DTD-a standard XML vocabulary
-> Document Capable of Automated Data
>
Processing) + XSL Style Sheet = Human-Readable Document
> > >
> > > >
> > > > The updated form of this concept
for the subcommittee would be
> something like:
> > > >
> >
> > GJXDM -> Information Exchange Package + XSL Style Sheet and/or
XSL
> Transform and/or XSL Formatting Objects =
Human-Readable Document
> > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> > > > In a summary statement
of why to bring back the work of the Documents
>
Subcommittee, it compliments the current work of the larger committee and of
> the Justice community in that it takes the
Information Exchange Packages
> built out of XML
data and tra
> > nslates the data into a human
viewable document.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Example
Reasons for Pursuing Fully XML Based Documents With Human
> Readable Views in the Documents Subcommittee:
> > > >
> > > > *
Create less of a need to verify manually that the data sent in to
> the case management system is the same as is in
the human viewable version
> > >
> > > >
> >
> > * Allow document management and creation functions to become able to
> be much more flexible and robust due to the
contents of the documents being
> able to be
understood by the machine more than a straight binary
> (PDF/DOC/etc) file would be
> > >
> > > >
> >
> > * Facilitation of automated reasoning systems
> > > >
> > > > * For
large law firms and executive branch agencies, there is more of
> a carrot to adopt e-filing as their forms
creation process is more
> simplified and they can
improve the intelligence and reuse of their
>
documents easier with the contents marked up
>
> with XML
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > Outline of Plan for Documents Subcommittee:
> > > >
> > > >
Objectives:
> > > >
> > > > * Main: Develop a base set of IEP's with human
presentable transforms
> for display.
> > > > * Secondary: If appropriate
and open methods are found, or developed,
> then
formulate an updated Court Document Specification that uses schemas and
> newer formatting technology.
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > Documents to Start Working With as Examples:
> > > >
> > > > Dr.
Leff, of Western Illinois University, and some of his students
> have produced several court documents with
transforms into HTML. This work
> is viewable
at http://www.wiu.edu/users/mflll/CriminalJusticeZoo.html.
> > >
> > >
>
> > > > The AOC in Georgia has many
Child Support Enforcement related
> documents that
are being diagrammed, mapped to IEP guideline compliant
> schema, and then mapped to transforms and style sheets to make
them usable
> for data exchange between systems and
for
> > human presentation.
> > >
> > >
>
> > > >
>
> > > Work for the Documents Subcommittee:
> > > >
> > > > The
Documents Subcommittee of the OASIS LegalXML Court Filing
> Technical Committee will be needed for domain expert knowledge of
both
> courts and XML technologies for use in
vetting the electronic documents and
> the methods
used to produce the electron
> > ic documents.
> > >
> > >
>
> > > >
>
> > > Draft Timeline for Documents Subcommittee:
> > > >
> > > > August
5th - Submit information about plans for the Subcommittee to
> full TC on list serve
> > > >
> > > > August 19th - Submit Example
Document Package with schemas,
> transforms, and
style sheets and draft explanation of method used to
> produce.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > August
19th-September 2nd- Comment and Revision Period
>
> > >
> > > > September 9th -
Submission of Revised Document Package and a draft of
> a methodology to reproduce for other documents and refinement and
expansion
> of the functionality of the methods
used to create the first document
> package.
> > >
> > >
>
> > > > September 9th-September 30th
- Comment and Revision Period
> > > >
> > > > September 12th- Submit summary
report to main TC list serve
> > > >
> > > > October 14th- Submit revised
document package with updated
> documentation
> > > >
> >
> > October 28th - Subcommittee Conference call and vote on whether to
> move forward with preparing an updated Court
Documents Specification or
> whether more work
needs to be done for methodology to create documents.
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> > > > Thank you for your time
in looking over this proposal for reviving the
>
Documents Subcommittee.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you,
> > > >
> > > > Rex
McElrath
> > > > Judicial Council
> > > > Administrative Office of the
Courts
> > > > 244 Washington St. SW, Ste
300
> > > > Atlanta, GA 30334
> > > > 404-657-9218
> > > > mcelratr@gaaoc.us
> >
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
-----------------------------------------
>
> > > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are intended
solely for
> > > > the use of the entity
or individual(s) to whom they are addressed and
>
> > > not for reliance upon by unintended recipients. If you
are not the
> > > > intended recipient or
the person responsible for delivering the e-mail
>
> > > to the intended recipient be advised that you have received
this
> e-mail
> >
> > in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or
> > > > copying of this e-mail and any
files transmitted are strictly
> > > >
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please delete
> the
> > > >
entire email and immediately notify us by email to the sender or by
> > > > telephone to the AOC main office
number, (404) 656-5171. Thank you.
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe from this mail
list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> > >
> generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs
in
> OASIS
> > >
> at:
> > > > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> >
> >
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must
leave the OASIS TC that
> > generates this
mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
> OASIS
> > at:
> > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> >
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must
leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this
mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
> at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php