20140610 arb minutes

ARB - Meeting (Date in Title)

Agenda

1. Call to order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Agenda and Minutes
4. Methodology
   1. SAIF-CD Tutorial Lorraine
   2. SAIF-CD review (Zoran and Andy)(30 minutes)
      1. SAIF-CD source of truth
   3. DAM reconciliation
      1. Document in SVN
      2. Comment Accept the proposed change, and a definition of logical model - reference SAIF glossary
         1. Cannot find the definition
   4. BAM sections Review:
      1. Section 7 Business Architecture Lorraine
      2. Section 8 Implementation Lorraine
5. Other business and planning
6. Adjournment

Meeting Information

HL7 ArB Work Group Meeting Minutes Location: Telcon		Date: 20140610 Time: 5:00pm U.S. Eastern
Facilitator	Julian, Tony	Note taker(s)	Julian, Tony
Attendee	Name	Affiliation
.	Bond,Andy	NEHTA
X	Constable, Lorraine	Constable Consulting Inc.
R	Curry, Jane	Health Information Strategies
R	Dagnall, Bo	HP Enterprise Services
X	Hufnagel, Steve	U.S. Department of Defense, Military Health System
X	Julian, Tony	Mayo Clinic
X	Loyd, Patrick	ICode Solutions
X	Lynch, Cecil	Accenture
X	Milosevic, Zoran	Deontik Pty Ltd
X	Parker, Ron	CA Infoway
.	Quinn, John	Health Level Seven, Inc.
R	Stechishin,Andy	CANA Software and Service Ltd.
.	Guests
X	Kreisler, Austin	Former HL7 TSC Chair
.
.	Legend
X	Present
.	Absent
R	Regrets
Quorum Requirements (Co-chair + 3) Met: Yes

Minutes

1. Approval of Agenda and Minutes
   1. Motion to approve Agenda and Minutes (Lorraine/Zoran)
   2. Vote 7-0-1
2. Methodology
   1. SAIF-CD Tutorial Lorraine
      1. Read through it. The content is describing what is in the spec. Lorraine or Zoran could present, with Patrick.
      2. What are we trying to achieve? We are not instructing on how to apply - teaching what is in the SAIF-CD. Do we want to tweak to give more guidance.
      3. Patrick: The SAIF-IG is missing - a tutorial on how to apply needs it. IT is a good presentation for what is in it, requirements, concepts. Question is: What do we do - record what is there? Should we take the tutorial and add instructional - have we learned enough from the alpha projects? if not could we add anything.
      4. Ron: The Canonical is done. The BAM came along which superseded the evolution. We never connected the dots between applying the SAIF. The articulation of the BAM is not inconsistent, but we have not connected the dots. The BAM does not have to be done to explain the need for subseqant processes.
      5. Lorraine: What is the target audience and What is the Goal.
      6. Ron: Keith Boone used it.
      7. Lorraine: Patrick has used it also.
      8. Patrick: If we had a SAIF-IG tutorial, would anyone want to learn about the Canonical? Not sure anyone would want the theory if they could get the application.
      9. Lorraine: If IG was there, it would be for people to implement the BAM.
      10. Cecil: Needs to be revisited: Especially the information framework to be more usable with FHIR.
      11. Lorraine: After the normative edition?
      12. Cecil: Before.
      13. Ron: We need to tell the story backwards, and differently: Here is what it is, and why it matters?
      14. Lorraine: As a webinar it would not have value.
      15. Ron: Could reduce narrative to use as an IG process presentation.
      16. Lorraine: Could focus on it in July.
      17. Zoran: 1/2 what is in it, 1/2 how to use it. Leverage application from Keith and others. Put it in the form of a user manual.
      18. Lorraine:Maybe in early I will put thought to it, and reach out to key people.
      19. Patrick: Need to do Tutorial after Normative.
   2. SAIF-CD review (Zoran and Andy)(30 minutes)
      1. SAIF-CD source of truth
      2. Zoran:I looked at the behavioral.
      3. Zoran: Language is the meta-model, Grammer is the IG.
      4. Zoran: Forward reference to dimensions and perspectives?
      5. Ron: Needs a short definition - used as a way to organize the artifacts.
      6. Zoran: WIll add some wording about dimensions and perspectives.
      7. Zoran: Line 228 "organization specific IG". Do we want to have SAIF-IG only for organizations, or can we apply in context to refine for a specific purpose.
      8. Steve:Inherently you could have an IG for any domain.
      9. Lorraine: Narrowed in that area. May be unweidly.
      10. Zoran: Has been used for domains such as healthcare.
      11. Steve: organizations seem unwilling to do an IG.
      12. Zoran: Australia has tried.
      13. Steve:Australia is more than an organization.
      14. Lorraine: Do you have a suggested term?
      15. Zoran: I have not thought about it.
      16. Zoran: Line 288" The language of the Governance Framework (GF) enables an enterprise implementing SAIF to define explicit, organization-specific policies, standards, and roles to artifact-specific content and representational choices that use the languages specified in the Behavior and Information Frameworks" does not parse!
      17. Steve: domain instead of artifact?
      18. Lorraine: Needs to be wordsmithed.
      19. Zoran: line 319:"The language of the Behavioral Framework (BF) defines constructs to specify the dynamic semantics of interactions in a shared purpose interoperability scenario."- interaction implies dynamic.
   3. BAM sections Review:
      1. Section 7 Business Architecture Lorraine
         1. Lorraine:What is the difference betwee charter and terms of reference?
         2. Lorraine: There are participants not in the diagram.
         3. Lorraine: Definition of platform goals missing.
         4. Lorraine:7.2.1 Did we model charter right? Who creates it? Does not match current practice. Recomment to TSC.
      2. Section 8 Implementation Lorraine
3. Other business and planning
   1. Next week:
      1. Saif-IG
      2. BAM
      3. DAM
4. Adjournment
   1. Adjourned at 6:04pm Eastern

Tony Julian (talk) 22:05, 10 June 2014 (UTC)