OASIS LegalXML Electronic Court Filing (ECF) Technical Committee (TC)

Conference Call Agenda

February 14, 2017 11am –noon EST / 4pm – 5pm UTC

·  https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/696322069

·  United States: +1 (571) 317-3122, Access Code: 696-322-069

Welcome new members:

·  John Chatz – HP Enterprise

·  Barbara Holmes – NCSC

·  Old Business

1.  Review/approval of previous meeting minutes

2.  Steering Committee Updates

  1. Please review LegalRuleML 1.0 Public Review 1 – feedback due March 14, 2017

http://docs.oasis-open.org/legalruleml/legalruleml-core-spec/v1.0/csprd01/legalruleml-core-spec-v1.0-csprd01.zip

Request: Please review and provide feedback on LegalRuleML.

3.  Outreach

4.  ECF 5.0 Core Specification

  1. Release Schedule
  2. Planning public review in Q1 2017.
  3. Targeting first release in Summer 2017.

Action Item: Please review the draft schemas and UML that Jim Cabral pushed out last week

  1. Current: Working Draft 04, UML model, NIEM mapping, schemas, instances
  2. https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/legalxml-courtfiling/document.php?document_id=59966
  3. Jim Cabral will update the specification to the latest OASIS template when he receives it from the TC administrators.
  4. NIEM 3.2 mapping and schemas:
  5. Mapping questions
  6. Combine AllocateCourtDate and ReserveCourtDate operations?
  7. Probably not – validate

Jim McMillan is scheduling a meeting – defer this decision until we discuss the content of the messages during that meeting.

  1. Should Court Policy include list of MDEs, their MDE type and locations? New GetOperation operation returns list of supported operations by an MDE?
  2. Validate additions to CourtPolicy

Decision: Supported operations will be optional.

  1. Restrict message cardinalities?
  2. Validate use of structures:reference and xsi:nllable in schemas.

ECF 5 draft schemas – look at the PersonAssociation for example.

Please look at schemas to identify an additional uses of references.

The model directory contains the CSV mapping to NIEM.

  1. Create separate initial and subsequent extensions for each case type?
  2. Probably not - validate

Case type specific extensions were originally intended for initial filings only. We talked previously about using the same for both. However, if we do (for example) the schemas would need to allow for:

·  A criminal subsequent filing with no criminal charges (makes sense)

·  A criminal initial filing with no criminal charges (does not make sense)

Decision: We will not have separate extensions for initial vs. subsequent. Implementers would need to handle caveats such as the one cited above.

ii. Terminology question - Should we align ECF Terminology with WSDL and UML terms?

ECF / WSDL / UML
User (e.g. Filer, Clerk) / Actor or Entity
Use Case
MDE / Definitions / Component <service> or <process>
MDE / Service / Port (provided interface)
MDE / Binding (e.g. SOAP, HTTP GET/POST) / Class <implementationClass
MDE / PortType / Class <Interface>
Operation / Operation / Operation
(Request/Response/Callback) Message / (Input/Output) Message (document/literal wrappers) / Parameter
(Request/Response/Callback) Message / Type / Class <Type>

5.  Should each MDE have its own WSDL?

Action Item: GreenFiling and Tyler both plan to work with the ECF 5 artifacts with their development tooling, with plans to provide feedback in March.

6.  Rename MDE to Service, Port or Component?

7.  Use Message to refer to WSDL Document/Literal Wrapper?

8.  Use Request/Response and Callback to refer to WSDL types?

9.  ECF4 included fingerprints, palm prints, and DNA for criminal defendants. Should we replace all of those with just a transaction control number (e.g. j:RapSheetTransactionControlIdentification)?

10.  See CaseOfficialRoleCode.gc (attorneys) and CaseParticipantRoleCode.gc (other persons and organizations). Should we have separate code lists for non-attorney person and organization participants?

11.  Deprecate embedding base64 encoded documents in XML?

  1. #67 - Identify missing Augmentation (extension) Points
  2. Each message has its own extension point
  3. Extension points are also provided for certain objects (see specification)
  1. New Features

i.  #65 - Better support for confidentiality/security

  1. Define a court specific code list in Court Policy
  2. Philip Baughman will recommend a baseline code list

Action Item: Philip will upload his document to the TC.

ii. #19 - Add court scheduling

  1. We need content for each of the scheduling messages.
  2. Jim McMillan will schedule a workshop
  3. #62 – Revisit solutions/approaches for e-signatures
  4. We haven’t updated them in 10 years. Should we update them now?
  5. #48 - Consider Criminal Case Updates
  6. Jim Harris will compare to Global Charging Service SSP

Action Item: Jim Harris will send an update thru the TC list.

5.  ECF 5.0 Web Services SIP

  1. Jim Cabral will update the specification to the latest OASIS template when he receives it from the TC administrators.

b.  #5 - Format Web Services SIP as an SSP

  1. #58 - New MQ SIP

6.  Action Items

https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/legalxml-courtfiling/members/action_items.php

·  New Business

7.  Schedule

Next TC Conference Call: March 14, 2017 11am –noon EST / 4pm – 5pm UTC

Next TC Face-To-Face Meeting: Apr 21 – New Brunswick, NJ (with CourtHack 2017)