Server/desktop might come into play where an office is doing some sort of eDiscovery and the documents need to be in a database somewhere for more than one attorney to view/review.
Plus, there's print servers, phone servers (might as well throw Asterix or something into it, no?), general file servers, etc. An office that is bigger than a solo practitioner would need these, I think. Of course, all that could be "version 2" while the focus remains on a usable desktop environment. K On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Barbara Figueirido < [email protected]> wrote: > Hello all! > > I support your re-categorization proposals, Elaine! > > I would like to add a couple of things, if you don't mind. > > - I would keep the distinction between "legal office administration" and > "court administration", since though similar in their needs, there might > be some nuances that make them somewhat incompatible, I would think (I > am not totally sure of this, maybe some exchange is necessary on this > subject). I think that a 'legal' Blend should cater to both kinds of uses. > > - I totally agree with you in that the server/desktop categorization > might not be very useful for a law office. > > - I would like to propose a sub-category for "evidence management"? Or > is it within document processing (I personally would think of both as > separate categories)? > (Not that there is much soft around for this item that I know of -at > least FOSS-, but I'm sure it's an area where the need will arise if it > isn't there yet). > > - Your objections regarding the "legal research" category are quite > valid, but I think that law offices might well try to centralize local > court decisions, so I would consider making a sub-category around the > idea of "precedents collection", since it seems to me that regardless of > the legal system you are working with, there will always be a need for > managing the enormous amount of information on legal precedents (roman > systems do also rely quite a lot on precedents, although they do might > not have the binding force they have in common law systems). In some > places, specialized legal information providers are quite expensive and > unaffordable to small offices in an updateable form, so they might want > to manage their own in-house collection. > > Anyway, your proposals are great, even without these additions, you took > a lot of trouble rearranging categories, I like very much the focus on > "entities". > > Kind regards to all, > Barbara Figueirido > > > > ter wrote: > > Hi, > > > > After reviewing the current categories and their packages, I have been > > working on a different decomposition, so that the blends metapackages > > would make more sense. The categories I am proposing are: > > > > * Case Management > > * Logging/Tracking/Calendaring > > * Accounting/Billing > > * Document Processing > > > > The rationale is here: http://wiki.debian.org/TElaineR/ReCategorizing. > > Comments and suggestions are appreciated. > > > > Elaine > > > > > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > [email protected] > > -- In Vino Veritas http://rubbernecking.info
