This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "September 7th, 2010 Security Conference Call"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Finaversaggi (talk | contribs) |
Finaversaggi (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
*'''Tony''': Request administrative privileges to update GForge. | *'''Tony''': Request administrative privileges to update GForge. | ||
**'''Mike''' to approve once request has been submitted | **'''Mike''' to approve once request has been submitted | ||
| + | *Mike: Will check with VA terminologists about whether LOINC clinical object codes have been linked to SNOMED-CT | ||
===2. Resolutions - none=== | ===2. Resolutions - none=== | ||
Revision as of 15:58, 13 September 2010
Contents
Security Working Group Meeting
Attendees
Agenda
- (05 min) Roll Call, Accept Minutes August 31st Security Work Group, Call for additional agenda items & Accept Agenda
- (05 min) Pat Pyette - PASS Audit Update
- (05 min) John Moehrke - John’s updates regarding the Risk Assessment
- (50 min) Security and Privacy Ontology project
- Security Ontology discussion on LOINC table mapping to RBAC objects. Table provides a connection from the ontology to portions of (possibly) SNOMED CT which is part of the project scope.
- Updates from Tony.
Minutes
1. Action Items
- Tony: Request administrative privileges to update GForge.
- Mike to approve once request has been submitted
- Mike: Will check with VA terminologists about whether LOINC clinical object codes have been linked to SNOMED-CT
2. Resolutions - none
3. Updates/Discussion
PASS Audit Update
No update today, but this ballot is now open. Please sign up to vote.
Security & Privacy Ontology Project
- LOINC to RBAC discussion:
- This discussion related to examining the LOINC objects to determine which map to HL7 permission catalog and how they would map to SNOMED CT.
- The purpose is to determine how we will use the ontology to link a different ontology (a bridge ontologies—which we may use or SNOMED CT directly)
- Question: Is this a new ontology vs. an update to the current ontology?
- Yes, we wouldn’t’ necessary put these items in the RBAC catalog directly — instead we should be able to map these terms to the various linkages, e.g., to SNOMED-CT.
- The premise is that the relationship to SNOMED-CT has been harmonized to LOINC. Mike will check with the VA terminologies to confirm this assumption.
Tony has posted the first draft of the Security-Privacy Ontology expressed in OWL 2 and suitable for viewing with the Protégé 4.1 OWL Editor.
- In addition, for those who are not using Protégé, there is a Word document with screen shots and other information.
- Corresponding wiki entries will be made after Tony Weida obtains proper wiki access.
- Tony will pass along files to Serafina and Suzanne until he is able to post on GForge.
- Tony will make a request to join the HL7 Security GForge space. Mike can then approve the addition.
