[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] [Fwd: ECF 1.1 spec testing status repo rtfrom King County, Washington]
The problem with ambiguous elements that Catherine discusses in several places in her report reminds me of the comment by Dr. Leff in his ebXML liaison report about the rest of the world using a "construction" approach to element definition instead of our "restriction" approach. Revising our standards accordingly to use the construction approach should resolve some of the existing implementation ambiguities and make the standards more interoperable. -----Original Message----- From: John M. Greacen [mailto:john@greacen.net] Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 6:16 AM To: Court Filing List Cc: Marty Halvorson Subject: [legalxml-courtfiling] [Fwd: ECF 1.1 spec testing status report from King County, Washington] Here is a short but very helpful status report on the use of the 1.1 specification in King County. Catherine and Roger have asked for comments and suggestions on one issue they have encountered. Does anyone have any ideas for them? -- John M. Greacen Greacen Associates, LLC. 18 Fairly Road Santa Fe, NM 87507 505-471-0203
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC