This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here

20100128 arb minutes

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Template:Arb minutes Architecture review Board Meeting Minutes

January 28, 2010

Back to Agenda-minutes


NamePresentWithAffiliationE-mail address
Aneja, PaulNoGuest 
Curry, JaneYesArBHealth Information
Grieve, GrahameNo ArBKestral
Julian, TonyYesArBMayo
Koehn, MarcNo GuestGordon point Informatics
Koisch, JohnYesArBGuidewire
Loyd, PatrickNo ARBGordon point Informatics
Lynch, CecilYesArBontoreason
Mead, CharlieNo
Ocasio, WendellNo ArBAgilex
Parker, RonYesArBCA
Peres, GregNoGuest  
Platt, JoeNoGuestEkagra Software
Quinn, JohnNoArBHealth Level Seven,
Robertson, ScottNoGuestKaiser
Shakir, Abdul-MalikNoArBShakir
Smith, KarenYesGuestTechnical
Thompson, CliffYesGuestOntoSolutions
VanArsdall, EddieNoGuest  
Vanderzel, MichaelNo GuestUMCG,

  • Call to order
  • Approval of agenda
  • Approval of minutes
  • Communication action items

  • Due process for name change from SAEAF to Services Aware Interoperability Framework (SAIF)
  • Peer Review Process... ownership of the review process and approach
  • Other business, and planning for next meeting
  • Adjournment

Call to order

Meeting was called to order at 6:03PM by chair Ron Parker with Tony Julian as scribe. Quorum was achieved.

Approval of agenda

Agenda was approved by affirmation.

Approval of minutes

Formal acceptance of minutes was not accomplished.

Communication action items

[| ]

John Koisch: Communication plan is at Communications plan

John Koisch: read the page for an update. Point was to communicate.

Jane Curry: Should we be adding reshaping the guide?

John Koisch: Maybe later: At this time we are doing it after the WGM. We are trying to publish before the WGM. If there is something out there, put it there.

Cecil Lynch: We dont know what portions will be rolled into others.

Ron Parker: Should show to MnM before we put it up. John do you want stuff to come to you, you will post.

John Koisch: I have not gotten anything from anyone. If I get today I will update, after tomorrow COB it is better if everyone comes to the wiki page, and update yourself.

Ron Parker: Fair Enough. Looking at status.

Cecil Lynch: RE: 1405 I have a number of things to put together, I have them in place, I have to coalesce into a readable document, probably next week.

Jane Curry: I wanted to do GF before end of week - I understand I am constrained to approx 10 pages - I need to know what more I need to do beside the definitions. I have dictionary def, and what it means to the framework.

Ron Parker: Please push it out.

Jane Curry: Inclined to do a model.

TONY: Update action list from publications page.

Cecil Lynch: RE: 1408: Ann wont be able to comment on the model until next week. I have incorporated Charlies comments, and next week Ann will fill in the graphs. There were relationships she left blanks on.

John Koisch: We should not get hungup on statuses.

Ron Parker: Yes, for visibility.

Jane Curry: We got knocked for not being visible.

John Koisch: They are getting what is there.

Ron Parker: I will operationalize the plan. I will try to join FTSD telcons. There is an overlap between FTSD and TSC - I was confused that FTSD is disenfranchised.

John Koisch: The issue is how HL7 deals with other standards organizations. The VOCAB group agreed to a communications plan to socialize CTS2. Waiting for Vocab to publish.

Ron Parker: Reviewing SAEAF intro, plan for tuesday next week. 1423: I am working on it - getting input from Frieda Hall, shipped to PIC committee. Am waiting for response.

Ron Parker: 1424 Added Dale to present RIMBAA to us on a call.

John Koisch: These items are only to communications plan?

Ron Parker: Action list is not only communication plan - but other items.

John Koisch: Alpha updates are missing.

Ron Parker: We need a list of alhpa projects and contacts.

Cecil Lynch: Do we need something about TOGAF.

Ron Parker: I will speak to the mapping of TOGAF.

John Koisch: I sent links to where RM-ODP and TOGAF overlap. Suggested a white paper.

Ron Parker: Not ready to do that yet

 Ron will add action item

Due process for name change from SAEAF to Services Aware Interoperability Framework (SAIF)

Ron Parker: Andy suggested a change from SAEAF to SAIF. Still using services metaphor to apply rigor to our specification. Charlie is about to take to TSC. Discussion.

Jane Curry: From the editors point of view, this will require a fair update to what has been delivered.

Ron Parker: Throughout the document.

Jane Curry: This has impact. The project is approved. The initial estimate is low, because of the number of iterations is more than anticipated. Change name after review - since will change the DITA structures. Can approach conservatively.

Ron Parker: If TSC approved, for all new material, I want TSC to be authoritative, not the genereal community.

Cecil Lynch: There is enough confusion and resistance.

Ron Parker: Charlie will take to TSC. Will make provision clear to Charlie.

==Peer Review Process... ownership of the review process and approach

Ron Paker: Put together a spreadsheet for review. I want to assert that it would be helpful to us as ArB to have someone else adjudicate the process. Should we forget about it?

Jane Curry: I think we should use Lynn's assistance, since it is TSC responsibility.

Ron Parker: Solves a number of things.

Jane Curry: Comes over with more authority.

Ron Parker: Struggling with who - I think Lynn will herd the cats.

Jane Curry: Comments should be against the PDF.

Ron Parker: They will comment, and we will edit. I will come before the peer review process. The review requester outlines who should review: Mandatory and Optional. We will deal with comment disposal later.

Jane Curry: There are different groups who if they did not weigh in, at least indicate they had read it, would open ourselves for problems later on.

Ron Parker: We should ask for reviewers to indicate their intent. I dont want them to come back on us if they dont get to it. We should solicit if noone responds.

Ron Parker: My assumptions are comments by mid-march, with a couple of meetings to discuss before the WGM, push the results to the reviewers, and finish at WGM.

Jane Curry: Scope? PDF from the word docs to get ahead with the process?

Ron Parker: Recommendation was that we do word docs with line numbering genereated. PDF should have that in it.

Ron Parker: Form requires citation of entry.

Rio WGM meeting schedule

Rio 2010 WGM agenda

Page was approved.

Cecil Lynch: Good idea about Tuesday Q4.

Ron Parker: That is how the week goes.

Harmonization for SAEAF/SAIF

Ron Parker: Charlie will discuss.

Jane Curry: Is this as we harvest artifacts, and specifications look like?

John Koisch: For SAEAF or overall architecture?

Ron Parker: I think it is greater than that - for conversations that dont happen at WGM.

Jane Curry: The idea that WG's should learn to align - to help them understand the implications, and recommendations for coherence across documents.

Ron Parker: Will help us operationalize through the organization. Not just about SAEAF. Charlie will bring up to TSC on monday. It affects us, and are acutely involved. I hope they wont start before next WGM. The only other think is if there is no traction, we need to probe. We will need it.

John Koisch: It would be usefull for a three-day harmonization, 1.5 SAEAF, 1.5 others, gradually the SAEAF work will fall off.

Ron Parker: See what Charlie tells us.

Ron Parker: Agenda for next week.

Cecil Lynch: Put ECCF into topic map. OWL is more flexible - i would use it for extensibility - that cant be done with topic maps.

Jane Curry: Is that an expectiation?

Cecil Lynch: An expectation to what?

Jane Curry: Charlie thought it was necessary for convenience.

Ron Parker: Cecil, put it out with your comments.

Cecli Lynch: Topic map has attributes. The XTM specification does not allow for extenstion. Maps based on OWL allow you to extend the language. The XTM properties can be expressed in OWL, then extended. I wil lput it out with the topic maps.

Jane Curry: I need to understand the rational and purpose.

Cecil Lynch: Looking at topic maps to capture the high levels. It would align to DITA - topic map is a way to index the data - if the goal is to index to topics - you can represent DITA parts as resources to the topic maps. You can also do with OWL. Idea got put in the queue, I ported from CMAP to topic maps, and did not find it impressive.

Ron Parker: Topic for next week.

Jane Curry: Metadata for the DITA we are working on for next week - I wanted recommendations.

Karen Smith: When we are looking at the authors name, if we can look at the category search, and look at the version and number, and see if they coorelate.

Jane Curry: Can we have a proposed strategy next week.

Ron Parker: Karen, we will talk about it next week.

John Koisch: I was going to backup Cecil. IF the topic map needs to be expressed in the topic map, it is simple, but there are expresssivenes problems. What is the excercise about and aimed at?

Jane Curry: Do we expect it to be discoverable by someone other than HL7? Web based tools for discovery are not necessarily one of our objectives.

Cecil Lynch: They are discoverable in a formal way using owl. The continuum of expressivity of semantics, topic map is at the lower end. It is a straightforward transform. You could do it anyway.

Jane Curry: In the short term we should use the DITA meta-data - from the useability point of view, then we can find what we need before we make decisions.

Ron Parker: Seem to be downstream.Action Items - put material on the site. Charlie is working on something.

Ron Parker: I will poke people on the action items on tuesday.

Other business, and planning for next meeting

  • Review meta-data - alignment to ISO topic map (Charlie and Cecil?)
  • Peer review
  • Action Items - put material on the site


Meeting was adjourned at 6:56pm U. S. Eastern.

Tony 00:14, 29 January 2010 (UTC)