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

Difference between revisions of "March 22, 2011 Security Conference Call"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 27: Line 27:
 
#''(15 min)'' '''final ballot content for the May cycle is due on Sunday, March 27''' Follow through on the notification of intent to ballot the Security and Privacy Ontology material.''' ~ Tony Weida
 
#''(15 min)'' '''final ballot content for the May cycle is due on Sunday, March 27''' Follow through on the notification of intent to ballot the Security and Privacy Ontology material.''' ~ Tony Weida
 
#''(15 min)'' '''Alignment with MVCO'''
 
#''(15 min)'' '''Alignment with MVCO'''
−
(continuing) Jaime Delgado agreed with the detail of alignment between the two ontologies (not to go specifically with only one ontology) they have sent a shorter description to be e-mailed to Tony later this week.
 
−
#''(15 min)'' '''Item3'''
 
 
#''(5 min)'' '''Call for Agenda Items [[May 2011 Working Group Meeting - Orlando, Florida USA, Security WG Agenda]] '''
 
#''(5 min)'' '''Call for Agenda Items [[May 2011 Working Group Meeting - Orlando, Florida USA, Security WG Agenda]] '''
  
−
# '''Action Item:''' An inquiry about aligning the ontology with SAIF was sent to Galen Mulrooney, (It has been mentioned on past Security-CBCC calls as a likely source of information).  ''Status: Awaiting response from Galen.'' 
+
==Meeting Minutes==
−
'''Tony received comment back from Cliff Thompson, Jim Buckner and Cecil Lynch have been contacted to review the document paragraph regarding SAIF'''  A suggestion was also made to ping co-Chair Bernd Blobel as well.
 
  
−
# '''Action Item:''' A paragraph was presented at the March 8th Security-CBCC meeting; comments were requested from the group but to date we have received none. So, a couple questions:I believe that the ideal of the security and privacy ontology is well aligned in principle with a service-aware interoperability framework. Services can take advantage of the ontology to intraoperative, but I’m not aware that the HL7 SAIF says anything specific how you should create or use ontologies, so I’m not able to detail how it specifically aligns with practice.
+
'''Final ballot content for the May cycle is due on Sunday, March 27'''
−
  1. Does the draft paragraph match your understanding?
+
'''Alignment with MVCO'''
−
  2. Should I ask other people for input, and if so, who? #''(5 min)'' '''Other Business''' - Request for Agenda Items for [http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=May_2011_Working_Group_Meeting_-_Orlando,_Florida_USA,_Security_WG_Agenda HL7 Working Group Meeting - May 2011, Orlando, Florida]
+
''(continued from last week)'' Jaime Delgado agreed with the detail of alignment between the two ontologies and sent several pages of text to Tony (MVCO group is generally in agreement with the alignment and to not to go specifically with only one ontology) Jaime will send a shorter description later this week for use in the Security and Privacy Ontology ballot draft material. Note: MVCO group was not on the call this week for further discussion.
 +
 
 +
'''Notification of intent to ballot the Security and Privacy Ontology material.'''
 +
Report Update given:
 +
* Minor changes have been made on the document. 
 +
** Clarification to the text definitions are intended to be brief summaries for the reader as well as consistent with the longer discussion in the reference sources including the HL7 RBAC Permission Catalog, Security and Privacy DAM and the ANSI-RBAC material.
 +
** Input for acknowledgments for identified contributors need to be added. 
 +
** Update to OWL files with date and descriptions to be completed and confirmed they are consistent with the document. 
 +
** Tony would also like to address any straightforward comments that come in. 
 +
 
 +
The last question posed to the group is--does the group wish to push forward with the ballot material to get input from the HL7 community?
 +
 
 +
Mike - It seems that we need Steering Division approval to push forward with this. Steering Division meets on Tuesday just prior to our weekly meeting. (John and Mike to take Action Item to contact Steering Division to move ballot material forward)
 +
 
 +
Submission deadline for Ballot is March 27 - this Sunday. The document has been updated, we will need to provide the updated document and the updated OWL files before the deadline.
 +
   
 +
'''Call for Agenda Items [[May 2011 Working Group Meeting - Orlando, Florida USA, Security WG Agenda]] '''
 +
 
 +
==ACTION ITEMS==
 +
1. '''Action Item:''' An inquiry about aligning the ontology with SAIF was sent to Galen Mulrooney, (It has been mentioned on past Security-CBCC calls as a likely source of information). 
 +
* ''Status: Response received from Galen.''  Comments have been incorporated into document paragraph.
 +
'''Tony received comment back from Cliff Thompson, Jim Buckner and Cecil Lynch have been contacted to review the document paragraph regarding SAIF''' 
 +
2. '''Action Item: ''' A suggestion was also made to ping co-Chair Bernd Blobel as well. '' '''Tony''' to contact Bernd regarding SAIF paragraph to be submitted in Security and Privacy Ontology document''
  
 
==Action Items==
 
==Action Items==
  
 
[[Security|Back to Security Main Page]]
 
[[Security|Back to Security Main Page]]

Revision as of 05:09, 12 April 2011

Security Working Group Meeting

Back to Security Main Page

Attendees

Back to Security Main Page


Agenda

  1. (05 min) Roll Call, Approve Minutes & Accept Agenda
  2. (15 min) final ballot content for the May cycle is due on Sunday, March 27 Follow through on the notification of intent to ballot the Security and Privacy Ontology material. ~ Tony Weida
  3. (15 min) Alignment with MVCO
  4. (5 min) Call for Agenda Items May 2011 Working Group Meeting - Orlando, Florida USA, Security WG Agenda

Meeting Minutes

Final ballot content for the May cycle is due on Sunday, March 27 Alignment with MVCO (continued from last week) Jaime Delgado agreed with the detail of alignment between the two ontologies and sent several pages of text to Tony (MVCO group is generally in agreement with the alignment and to not to go specifically with only one ontology) Jaime will send a shorter description later this week for use in the Security and Privacy Ontology ballot draft material. Note: MVCO group was not on the call this week for further discussion.

Notification of intent to ballot the Security and Privacy Ontology material. Report Update given:

  • Minor changes have been made on the document.
    • Clarification to the text definitions are intended to be brief summaries for the reader as well as consistent with the longer discussion in the reference sources including the HL7 RBAC Permission Catalog, Security and Privacy DAM and the ANSI-RBAC material.
    • Input for acknowledgments for identified contributors need to be added.
    • Update to OWL files with date and descriptions to be completed and confirmed they are consistent with the document.
    • Tony would also like to address any straightforward comments that come in.

The last question posed to the group is--does the group wish to push forward with the ballot material to get input from the HL7 community?

Mike - It seems that we need Steering Division approval to push forward with this. Steering Division meets on Tuesday just prior to our weekly meeting. (John and Mike to take Action Item to contact Steering Division to move ballot material forward)

Submission deadline for Ballot is March 27 - this Sunday. The document has been updated, we will need to provide the updated document and the updated OWL files before the deadline.

Call for Agenda Items May 2011 Working Group Meeting - Orlando, Florida USA, Security WG Agenda

ACTION ITEMS

1. Action Item: An inquiry about aligning the ontology with SAIF was sent to Galen Mulrooney, (It has been mentioned on past Security-CBCC calls as a likely source of information).

  • Status: Response received from Galen. Comments have been incorporated into document paragraph.

Tony received comment back from Cliff Thompson, Jim Buckner and Cecil Lynch have been contacted to review the document paragraph regarding SAIF 2. Action Item: A suggestion was also made to ping co-Chair Bernd Blobel as well. Tony to contact Bernd regarding SAIF paragraph to be submitted in Security and Privacy Ontology document

Action Items

Back to Security Main Page

Retrieved from "https://wiki.hl7.org/w/index.php?title=March_22,_2011_Security_Conference_Call&oldid=48829"