20080313 arb minutes

Architecture Board March 13, 2008 Attendees:

• John Koisch
• Charlie Mead
• John Quinn
• Jane Curry
• Mead Walker
• Cecil Lynch
• Grahame Grieve
• Abdul Malik Shakir

Agenda:

• Decision Making Practices
• Harmonization
• Glossary
• Dynamic Model

Minutes:

• BusinessProcess Modeling Page link: BusinessProcessArchitectureForHL7
• Dynamic Model discussion - MW does not think this is purview of ArB. GG believes it is somewhere between Arb responsibility and MnM responsibility. JK thinks that ArB should do the work by default of other groups within HL7, because DM is so essential to other issues. JC discussed the prudence of externalizing certain responsibilities of applications. AMS thinks that DM will likely focus on messaging when MnM does it, and SOA will look at it from SOA POV. There needs to be consistency / coordination across the standard. CL concurred, and urged consistency between information, vocabulary, technologies, and so on. CM noted that we still need the context of the BPM work. Where would work be done? AMS - DM will be done by combination of work done in INM, MNM, SD, and SOA. CM - Large scale enterprise architectures don't emerge from multiple projects. Requirements can emerge from multiple projects. There can be top down framework / guidance, but work has to happen from bottom up. JK use SOA DM as straw man. JC needs that we also need to establish quality criteria to hand to committees. MW How will we know a dynamic model when we see it? JC Quality requirements include what value a DM provides in an Interoperable environment (Why a DM at all? Also here a number of touchpoints that support success against which individual committees should evaluate.). We need to avoid wheel spinning. CM How would we write a sow, including coming up with requirements (including non-functional requirements) to evaluate a candidate dynamic model that is applicable across HL7. JC part of the problem is the incongruence between business models and technical models to meet those business requirements. GG supported: How would we know a good one if we saw one? INM and MnM have opinions to that. First step is coming up with a definition of what a dynamic model is. CM - we need to create an Architectural Requirements specification for a Dynamic Model, including input from the larger IT industry, and send that document out to various committees for feedback. JC - HDF Requirements chapter (http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/projects/hdf/) is a good place to start. JK is project lead of DM; CM is project lead of BPM project. Will use the Project Management methodology as defined by HL7.
• GG - Foundation Re_Org will be submitted to TSC.
• CM - DAM - there was no definition of a dynamic model, but ArB has now put one forward by email. Tony Julian