RE: DocumentStampInformation

Monday morning excuse regarding the prior message… which was incomplete. So it looks like what is envisioned is a reference tracking capability.

So the question is whether document stamp is just to carry the “visual authentication” for the filing reply or does it also need to handle the digital signature type verification stuff? The reason why there is a need for “visual authentication” is if the court accepted document is printed out to provide a copy to persons not on the internet. I think that the visual authentication stamp should be a QR code now… but that is me.

So if the court thinks they MUST have a visual file stamp because it is written into law (and even the form/format of the stamp is defined) then it is simply a PDF overlay/watermark layer on the document. Then it really isn’t a separate element as it is merged into the return “stamped/conformed” copy of the filing.

Just wanted to share a little more as I have thought about this a little.

Jim M

James E. McMillan – National Center for State Courts, USA

From: legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of James E Cabral
Sent: Monday, July 2, 2018 8:29 AM
To: Othon, Enrique <Enrique.Othon@tylertech.com>; legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [legalxml-courtfiling] RE: DocumentStampInformation

Enrique,

stampinformation:DocumentStampInformationMessage includes ecf:CaseTrackingID and j:CaseNumberText which I believe is correct. stampinformationcallback:NotifyDocumentStampInformationMessage includes ecf:CaseTrackingID and nc:Case.

Is there a reason stampinformation:DocumentStampInformationMessage should include nc:Case?

__
Jim Cabral
502 509-4532

From: legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org <legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Othon, Enrique <Enrique.Othon@tylertech.com>
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2018 9:06:25 AM
To: legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [legalxml-courtfiling] DocumentStampInformation

I was looking at the DocumentStampInformation request and I noticed the schema doesn’t include an nc:Case element.

Is there a reason for that or just an oversight?

legalxml-courtfiling message