This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
<meta name="googlebot" content="noindex">

Difference between revisions of "Services Aware Enterprise Architecture Framework"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
 
(4 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
{{arb deprecated item}}
 +
[[Category:Arb_Deprecated_item]]
 
  '''Services Aware Enterprise Architecture Framework (SAEAF)'''
 
  '''Services Aware Enterprise Architecture Framework (SAEAF)'''
  
 
[[Architecture_Board|Return to Architecture_Board]]
 
[[Architecture_Board|Return to Architecture_Board]]
−
# [[Introduction and Background|SAEAF_Intro]]
+
# [[SAEAF_Intro|Introduction and Background]]
 
## Context -- internal and external (business) drivers
 
## Context -- internal and external (business) drivers
 
## Value Propositions
 
## Value Propositions
 
### Notion of Conformance
 
### Notion of Conformance
−
### (other)
+
### Notion of Governance
 +
### Implementable Standards
 +
### Computable Semantic Interoperability
 +
### Specification Framework that contextualizes the "...ilities" (scalability, etc.)
 
## Assumptions
 
## Assumptions
 
### Existing HL7 artifacts
 
### Existing HL7 artifacts
Line 14: Line 19:
 
### Non-HL7 Input (sources, links, etc)
 
### Non-HL7 Input (sources, links, etc)
 
### [Listed In Moinutes]
 
### [Listed In Moinutes]
−
# Interoperability Service Contract Specifications
+
# [[SAEAF_ISCS|Interoperability Service Contract Specifications]]
 
## RM-ODP Framework
 
## RM-ODP Framework
 
### Viewpoints  
 
### Viewpoints  
 
### Assertions  
 
### Assertions  
 
## Artifacts
 
## Artifacts
 +
## Tying back to the Value Propositions
 +
### Notion of Conformance
 +
### Notion of Governance
 +
### Implementable Standards
 +
### Computable Semantic Interoperability
 +
### Specification Framework that contextualizes the "...ilities" (scalability, etc.)
 
# Implications
 
# Implications
 
## Implications to existing interoperability paradigms (V2, V3, CDA, etc.)
 
## Implications to existing interoperability paradigms (V2, V3, CDA, etc.)
 
## Implications for the use/interpretation of the RIM
 
## Implications for the use/interpretation of the RIM
−
## SDO's, with special emphasis towards OMG
+
## [[saeaf_sdo|SDO's, with special emphasis towards OMG]]
 
## Working groups, with special emphasis on SOA WG, MnM, INM, CDS, EHR, and Foundations SD
 
## Working groups, with special emphasis on SOA WG, MnM, INM, CDS, EHR, and Foundations SD
 
## JIC
 
## JIC
Line 78: Line 89:
 
#[[SAEAFSOAArtifacts|Artifacts for SOA]]
 
#[[SAEAFSOAArtifacts|Artifacts for SOA]]
 
''For report to TSC only - - [[SAEAFBallot Quality|Ballot Quality]]''
 
''For report to TSC only - - [[SAEAFBallot Quality|Ballot Quality]]''
−
 
−
 
  
 
[[User:Ajulian|Tony]] 14:00, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 
[[User:Ajulian|Tony]] 14:00, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 19:04, 22 March 2010

This page documents an, i.e. an issue within scope of the ArB Working Group that is no longer active content.
Services Aware Enterprise Architecture Framework (SAEAF)

Return to Architecture_Board

  1. Introduction and Background
    1. Context -- internal and external (business) drivers
    2. Value Propositions
      1. Notion of Conformance
      2. Notion of Governance
      3. Implementable Standards
      4. Computable Semantic Interoperability
      5. Specification Framework that contextualizes the "...ilities" (scalability, etc.)
    3. Assumptions
      1. Existing HL7 artifacts
        1. Message Payload Content
        2. Non-Payload Message Content
        3. Other (CDA, Vocabulary, CCOW, Datatypes, EHR-S FM, GELLO, PHR, etc.)
      2. Non-HL7 Input (sources, links, etc)
      3. [Listed In Moinutes]
  2. Interoperability Service Contract Specifications
    1. RM-ODP Framework
      1. Viewpoints
      2. Assertions
    2. Artifacts
    3. Tying back to the Value Propositions
      1. Notion of Conformance
      2. Notion of Governance
      3. Implementable Standards
      4. Computable Semantic Interoperability
      5. Specification Framework that contextualizes the "...ilities" (scalability, etc.)
  3. Implications
    1. Implications to existing interoperability paradigms (V2, V3, CDA, etc.)
    2. Implications for the use/interpretation of the RIM
    3. SDO's, with special emphasis towards OMG
    4. Working groups, with special emphasis on SOA WG, MnM, INM, CDS, EHR, and Foundations SD
    5. JIC
    6. NIST
    7. Tooling
  4. Potential Next Steps
    1. Developmental Governance (eg, ArB's role)
    2. Organizational Governance (eg, TSC's role)
  5. Appendices
    1. Conformance and Compliance Framework
    2. Dyanmic Framework
    3. Meta-Model for Services / UML Profile
    4. Service Principles
    5. Service Taxonomy










  1. 2bBAM
    1. Drivers(Goals, customer needs, Performance measurements) Tony - Review
    2. Organization(participants and roles) Tony - Review
    3. OrganizationStructures Tony- Review
    4. Organization Processes Tony - Review
    5. Artifacts Jane
      1. Taxonomy and roadmap of the standards John - Review
    6. Levels of Interoperability Service Contract Specifications(ISCS) (formerly known as trading partner agreements(TPA))
    7. Stack of specifications that support ISCS's John - Review
    8. Structure of HL7 delivers support for customers to craft ISCS
  2. Interoperability Service Specification
    1. Interoperability service contract specifications John - Review (Conformance and Compliance document from NCI as content)
      1. Service enabled Dynamic Framework Mead
      2. Static Model
    2. Meta-model
    3. Taxonomy of Services John - Review
    4. Service PrinciplesJohn - Review
  3. Conformance
    1. Conformance Criteria (assertions)
    2. Conformance adherence (Realization)
    3. Conformance Validation (Inspection/testing)
  4. Artifacts for SOA

For report to TSC only - - Ballot Quality

Tony 14:00, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.hl7.org/w/index.php?title=Services_Aware_Enterprise_Architecture_Framework&oldid=34609"