[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Timestamps
Jim, et al,
Authorized Timestamp
The document that I posted on 9/26/2005 contains this
working definition of what I have called 'Authorized Timestamp'
(call it what-you-will).
The
time when a user approved (released) a filing to be sent to the FilingReview
process.
As we discussed on the conference call, this value could be
generalized and made applicable to all messages. In that case, a
generalized definition might be:
The
time when a user or process approved (released) this message data to be
transmitted to a recipient MDE. The important aspect of the definition, it that we
understand this value is not synonymous with 'MessageAssembled timestamp'
(n/a), 'MessageSent timestamp', or 'MessageReceived timestamp', although,
in some systems, these timestamps might all be equal.
FilingReviewedTimestamp
In that 9/26/2005 document, I suggested that we should
have a place to express the time at which a clerk decided to accept or
reject a filing. In that 9/26/05
document, I proposed this draft definition of FilingReviewedTimestamp:
The
time when the FilingReview process (or user) decided that the filing was to be
accepted or rejected (or, when it decided that the filing could not be reviewed
at all)
We did not discuss this proposed value in today's
conference calls, but, to be honest, I think there would've been little
support for this value - it is more of a 'nice to know' than a 'need to
know'.
But WAIT!!.... I think it might be a
freebie:
If we agreed to make 'Authorized Timestamp' a member
of *all* of our messages...
...and also agreed to the functional definition
I proposed above (or something akin to it)...
....then the FilingReview_Callback message's 'Authorized
Timestamp' would represent the 'FilingReviewedTimestamp'. We
would have our bases covered.
How's that sound?
- Shane Durham
From: John M. Greacen [mailto:john@greacen.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 11:09 AM To: Electronic Court Filing Technical Committeee Subject: [legalxml-courtfiling] Conference call continuation Friends – I just touched base with The call information remains the
same: Call in number
1-605-528-8855 Access code
2892164 We will resolve the remaining issues
set forth below: 7. Whether we need a FilingAuthorized
Timestamp – the time when a user approved (released) a filing to be sent to the filing review process (Shane’s
recommendation). 8. Whether we need a FilingReceived
Timestamp – the time when the filing review MDE received (lodged) a filing in
addition to the originalMessageReceipt date and time (Shane’s
recommendation). 9. Whether we need a FiledTimestamp – the
legally effective
date assigned to a filed document (Shane’s
recommendation). 10. Whether we need a DocketingReceived
Timestamp – the time when the court record process receives a docketing (Shane’s
recommendation). 11. Whether we should adopt a model for
person-organization relationships that is independent of the model used by GJXDM
(Shane’s recommendation). 12 Whether we maintain the Service MDE (Shane
believes that we eliminated it). I hope that most of you will be able
to participate. John
M. Greacen Greacen
Associates, LLC HCR
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]