This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here

20121025 arb minutes

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

ARB - Meeting (Date in Title)

Agenda

  1. Call to order
  2. Roll Call
  3. Approval of Agenda
  4. Approval of Minutes
  5. Report from Architecture Project
  6. BAM
    1. BAM draft 2 Conceptual
    2. Charlies team
  7. Product lines and product families.
    1. Product lines and families
  8. Other business and planning
  9. Adjournment

Meeting Information

HL7 ArB Work Group Meeting Minutes

Location: Telcon

Date: 20121025
Time: 4:00pm U.S. Eastern
Facilitator Charlie Mead Note taker(s) Julian, Tony
Attendee Name Affiliation
X Bond,Andy NEHTA
X Constable, Lorraine Constable Consulting Inc.
X Curry, Jane Health Information Strategies
R Dagnall, Bo HP Enterprise Services
. Grieve, Grahame Health Intersections Pty Ltd
. Hufnagel, Steve U.S. Department of Defense, Military Health System
X Julian, Tony Mayo Clinic
. Loyd, Patrick ICode Solutions
X Lynch, Cecil Accenture
X Mead, Charlie National Cancer Institute
X Milosevic, Zoran NEHTA
R Parker, Ron CA Infoway
. Quinn, John Health Level Seven, Inc.
. Guests
X Kreisler, Austin TSC Chair
X Shakir, Abdul Malik City of Hope National Medical Center
. Legend
X Present
. Absent
R Regrets
Quorum Requirements Met: Yes

Minutes

  1. Minute Approval
    1. MOTION to accept20121018_arb_minutes previous minutes (Abdul Malik/Jane)
    2. VOTE: (5-0-0)
  2. Product lines and product families
    1. Product families draw on common reSources.
    2. Andy and Zoran live in an environment where product lines(PL)/product families(PF) have been operationalized.
    3. There is a consumer perspectieve as well as a producer perspective.
    4. Product family is from producer perspective.
    5. Abdul Malik:" any given product would belong to one family and one line?
    6. Charlie: In the manufacturing context, yes. Using kitchen appliances, a company in the business which made stove, refrigerators, counter tops, sinks. They have three markets: Industrial, Home, contractor. Methodologies and materials might be common. In that world a product does not live in more than one family.
    7. Charlie: In the interoperablilty world, the expectation would often be cross PF and/or PF.
    8. Andy: Conformity assessment is across PF. Some groups take the family and use that as a product line itself. families and lines drive organizations to better fit within PF, and leverage from PF - support technical interoperabilities, and get a greater sense of trust if there is a common conceptualization behind them. HL7 operates such that the product line is external to HL7: NEHTA takes HL7 products and quality assessments to create PF.
    9. Jane: The perspective of looking at lines from both directions, and considering the readiness of the organization to adopt. Cross use case, different PF have been adopted. Using SAIF governance definition of community as an organizing principle around a product line, the consumer select from PF to meet an objective. Could clarify strategies of consumers, depending on where they were in a readiness for interoperability sense. Should not confuse PF with use cases.
    10. Andy: PL and PF have value to both the producer and the consumer. You need both to create a balance. Need to optimize toward a common share PF.
    11. Charlie: Key feature of PF - there is more than one member, they share common reSources, common methodologies and tools. PL crashes into PF Someone thinks they are consuming CDA, and expect R2 and R3 to be compatible, when they vary at the Datatype levels. Conformity and consistency are a product family attribute.
    12. Andy: PL are adopted by consumers. Organization consumers may want to consume PF: A test lab buys into conformity assessment as a family - testing across product lines. A product line consumer may become a producer.
    13. Andy: PL are driven by marketing and communication: NEHTA product lines are driven by product managers. The PL will depend on the target: Medication management depends on other product lines. Understanding the reusable products are. Agree that families are characterized by common methodologies, tooling, and reSources. The consumer from HL7 wants to persue CDA implementation guides, that is a product line. Or is CDA a product? NEHTA consumes CDA as a building block for NEHTA products. NEHTA is more interested in generic CDA.
    14. Cecil: Can a collection of artifacts be a product line and a product family?
    15. Jane: Following the anology of manufacturing, we have OEM manufacturers who consider the HL7 product as value they sell to their end users. We could exploit the anology unless it runs aground. Remember we have to consider the customer, as well as the customer's customer.
    16. Charlie: We consider the dual architecture - if you take the premise that PF are a construct that the producer defines based on commonalities - PL are projecting these into the product segmentation. You said it was more complicated if a PL is a PF.
    17. Cecil: CDA: Looking at R3: From the fact that CDA-R1 is fixed to the RIM at a point in time. It is not a common set of products that go into V3 and CDA-R1. So now we have CDA-R2 and CDA-R3 as product lines, the data-types are different. So when we talk about PL we talk about versions of PL, and PF where there are elements where we call it a PL and PF, CDA is a PL, and in Some cases a PF.Cant have a class that has a class as an instance.
    18. Charlie: PF may have multiple PL.
    19. Cecil:I agree.
    20. Abdul Malik: No relationship between PL and PF. product type can be either. PL and PF aggregates product type.
    21. Charlie: how does this affect the meta-model?
    22. Abdul Malik: PL and PF are aggretators with different heuristics.
    23. Jane: HL7 does not understand what PL managers understand about their customers. Need to help customers select products for their purpose, and identify the constraints - it they are trying to put products together that cross use cases, we need a muti-dimensional representations. HL7 needs both a customers view as well as a production managers view to be successful - to deal with the challenges our customers face. We dont know enough to be product managers, and do not help our customers with degree of consistency across products.
    24. Cecil: How does this fit into RIMBAA, and how we define product lines for RIMBAA.
    25. Abdul Malik: what product does RIMBAA produce?
    26. Cecil: RIMBAA produces products that are inconsistent in usage.
    27. Jane: I have to come up with tooling strategy for PL and PF by the next WGM. RIMBAA is much in the picture, expectation that HL7 can promote tools targeted to downstream processes from a standard adoption.
    28. Charlie: from the ARB perspective, what should we do between now and next week? Wait for TSC discussion? Say we understand it - Andy was willing to update the matrix. What is the impact on the meta-model - or is it just tweaking? I am fine if everyone says to wait.
    29. Abdul Malik: the meta-model does not change. There is not concept of product.
    30. Charlie: Is there a consumer vs producer perspective?
    31. Jane: think through - need concrete examples instead of abstract.
    32. Charlie: Anybody have strong feelings about their being two different perspectives on a product? From the producers perspective the commonality exists in a multi-dimensionl box framed by common tools, methodology, and governance. I dont thing the TSC is conversant.
    33. Abdul Malik: Education is struggling with tutorials- currently V2, V3, and vocab tracks. That is our producers view. The consumers want organization by Meaningful use, or certification.
    34. Charlie: Consumers first cut is product and product lines.
    35. Abdul Malik: We put V2 Intro in the V2 track, MU track, and certification track.
    36. Charlie: Consumer perspective: individual vs commercial. I will pass back to the TSC - tell them that there are two perspectives:PL are primary interest to consumers, PF are primary interest to producers. I will factor in Andy's and Zoran's notes.
    37. Charlie: Do your assignment, but not contrary the concepts we have defined.
    38. Abdul Malik: Lorraine and I tried to work on our assignment, and got hung up on which layer - for a product line, or a product produced within a product line.
    39. Charlie: Rows need to be tweaked to PL because it is from the producer perspective and essentially is the processes related to PF.
    40. Zoran: Need to flesh out distinction in meta-model to distinguish the attributes of PL and PF. Not significant.
    41. Jane: The Meta-model needs to describe products - which PL and which PF, appropriately manage between then. Need to understand the influencers - consumer or producer. Impact on the matrix is on content, not structure. We need to have owners of PL and PF, owners are not in the matrix.
    42. Zoran: The levels need to address both.
    43. Abdul Malik: Lorraine and I will redo based on PL and PF.
  3. Adjournment at 5:00pm Eastern

Tony Julian 21:09, 25 October 2012 (UTC)