20130116 HL7 PLA Meeting

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

HL7 Product Line Architecture – 2013-01-15 Meeting

Return to HL7 Product Line Architecture Wiki Home Page<br\> Return to HL7 Product Line Architecture Meeting Minutes and Agendas

Attendees:

  • Andy Bond
  • Jane Curry,
  • Bo Dagnall,
  • Attila Farkus,
  • Rick Haddorff
  • Freida Hall
  • Dave Hamill
  • Austin Kreisler, (meeting chair)
  • Lynn Laakso (scribe)
  • Charlie Mead,
  • Ron Parker
  • Brian Pech,
  • John Quinn

Meeting Logistics

  • Dates: Wednesday Q3 of the Working Group Meeting
  • Time: 13:45 - 15:00 Pacific Time

Q3 Agenda for HL7 Product Line Architecture

  1. Roll Call
  2. Agenda Review
  3. Kickoff
    1. Brief (1-2 minutes) Project Status Updates (progress made and next steps)
      1. Pjt 915 - Business Architecture Model (ArB)
      2. Pjt 901 - Risk Assessment and Governance for HL7 Architecture Program (TSC)
      3. Pjt 890 - TSC Governance System for HL7 Business Architecture (TSC)
    2. BAM Overview (15 min) (Parker)
    3. How to start operationalizing the management of a portfolio of Product Lines (Kreisler)
      1. Listervs, Conf Call Passcodes, Work Groups by Prod Line or Prod Family?
    4. Report on discussions that have occurred during the week regarding a CDA Product Line (Kreisler)
  4. Next steps
    1. Determine a call schedule (Note: opposite Tuesdays at noon would conflict with the FTSD call)
    2. Create a Listserv Product Line Architecure Program?
    3. Next WGM Needs
  5. Time Permitting
    1. Identify candidates for Product Families and Product Lines (so far we have FHIR)
    2. How to take an existing set of products and make it into a Product Family/Product Line (e.g. CDA)

Minutes

Austin calls to order at 1:47 PM

  1. Roll Call - introductions made.
  2. Agenda Review - Austin noted he presented the product line architecture to the general session. Charlie offers a graphic on relationship between product lines/product families.
  3. Kickoff
    1. Brief (1-2 minutes) Project Status Updates (progress made and next steps)
      1. Pjt 915 - Business Architecture Model (ArB)
        • Charlie recounts the yeoman's work done to create the Archimate meta model. ArB got the model to the point of a coherent framework and now others need to add to it. Model is based on a product, whether balloted specification, IG, tooling, etc. with separation of management, methodology and governance operations.
        • Common tooling, resources and governance in a Product Family.
        • Common usage context, interoperability, traceability or collective use in a Product Line.
        • Tomorrow they'll release a spreadsheet for entering information or submit a UML model. Jane notes that the primary engagement is with the Steering Divisions - Austin notes the primary interaction is with TSC.
      2. Pjt 901 - Risk Assessment and Governance for HL7 Architecture Program (TSC)
        • Meeting regularly since Baltimore to triage risks. Multiple sources of risk identified and reviewed and 160+ risks identified and characterized. TSC stood up a standing committee TSC Risk Assessment Committee (TRAC) for continuous review and assessment. SAIF Governance points will be proposed to deal with high-priority items.
      3. Pjt 890 - TSC Governance System for HL7 Business Architecture (TSC) TSC has identified FMG, FGB and MnM for the three governance roles of the FHIR Product Family. Implementation details to be worked out as the PLA evolves. There are potentially changes to Steering Division composition and roles in TSC, etc. Changes to GOM are also anticipated.
    2. BAM Overview (15 min) Charlie describes the BAM status
      • Ron draws a relational picture of a matrix hierarchy between product lines and product families.
      • Andy describes their experience in NEHTA.
      • Ron adds that products developed in a product family that are context-neutral can be reused in multiple product lines. Governance in a product family has to do with quality, fitness for use, conformity assessment. Product line governance is more about traceability of requirements through fulfillment. Coherence for business purpose is the focus. External communication of product line is for a business purpose.
      • Pharmacy use case was requested to Austin, and Charlie spoke with John Hatem on the same topic.
      • SAIF IG must have appropriate catalogs of products to identify reuse of products in different product lines in addition to the conformity assessments and other features of a product line architecture. Jane notes that there have been instances of the same semantics modeled by different groups instead of refactoring something that is context-neutral.
      • Ron shows BAM UML profile graphic with emphasis on expressing requirements in addition to an explicitly declared desired result, and its end (business goal). The means at a conceptual level are the resources of the organization. He shows the activity diagram, and notes that the activity flows through the groups is not explicitly described.
      • Austin notes that the further familiarity of the TSC and the Product Line Architecture Program with the models will be very important.
    3. How to start operationalizing the management of a portfolio of Product Lines (Kreisler) This may be too early in the stage to jump to that level.
      1. Listervs, Conf Call Passcodes, Work Groups by Prod Line or Prod Family?
    4. Report on discussions that have occurred during the week regarding a CDA Product Line (Kreisler)
      • Starting the identification of Product Lines the CDA R2 IGs were discussed. We may be able to exercise both vertical and horizontal aspects simultaneously if we choose correctly.
      • Jane asks if the SDWG process of a CDA R2 IG uses a DAM at all? Part of their work examines what has been done in the domain committees. Austin notes some developers evaluate business purpose and some drive right to developing the solution.
      • Bo requests to add a third dimension to the grid as product subfamily, as with CDA as a family and the IGs as a subfamily. However for example DAMs are on occasion disconnected from each other and any other common models. Jane notes with common tools, common governance, common resources and some products are resources to other products or product lines. Governance of RIM as a set of datatypes, set of vocabulary, etc are what define a version of the RIM.
  4. Next steps
      • ArB has a set of next steps they are working on. TSC work with ArB on fleshing this out. ArB needs to make assertions of setting up product family. Set scope of families - ArB can assist with some of that documentation. Using the metamodel and documentation of methodology can come up with an inventory to review with the PLA Program, but ArB wants to clean up some of their metamodel first. Charlie is the "governance specialist". Jane suggests we use the methodology on the Business Architecture. Need to find a way to do so in a lean and agile manner, notes Ron.
    1. Determine a call schedule (Note: opposite Tuesdays at noon would conflict with the FTSD call) Send out a scheduling poll in mid-February. Invite TSC members, Project Services, and ArB facilitators in addition to interested parties.
      • Set up an listserv with those individuals on ArB, TSC, and Project Services.
    2. Next WGM Needs - we will need to meet. Probably needs to be more than one quarter. ArB is front-loading the WGM schedule to be free later in the week. May want to separate the quarters. Thursday would be better day to add a quarter for Austin in addition to this quarter.

Adjourned at 3:08 PM