This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "RIMBAA 200901 WGM Minutes"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Rene spronk (talk | contribs) (New page: Minutes of the RIMBAA WG from the Vancouver WGM (Sept. 2008). See also the published agenda for the Orlando WGM. ==Monday ...) |
Rene spronk (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | Minutes of the RIMBAA WG from the | + | Minutes of the RIMBAA WG from the Orlando WGM (Sept. 2008). See also the [[http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=RIMBAA_200901_WGM_Agenda|published agenda for the Orlando WGM]]. |
==Monday Q3 (13:45-15:00)== | ==Monday Q3 (13:45-15:00)== | ||
− | *Chair (interim, on behalf of Peter Hendler: Rene Spronk, scribe: Michael van der Zel | + | *Chair (interim, on behalf of Peter Hendler): Rene Spronk, scribe: Michael van der Zel |
*Attendees: | *Attendees: | ||
**Amnon Shabo, IBM (Israel) | **Amnon Shabo, IBM (Israel) | ||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
**Russ Sarbora, City of Hope | **Russ Sarbora, City of Hope | ||
**Hugh Glover, Bluewave Informatics (UK) | **Hugh Glover, Bluewave Informatics (UK) | ||
+ | ===Approval of Minutes=== | ||
*Approval of the minutes of the last WGM, available at [[RIMBAA 200809 WGM Minutes]] | *Approval of the minutes of the last WGM, available at [[RIMBAA 200809 WGM Minutes]] | ||
**Approved without objection, 10-0-6. | **Approved without objection, 10-0-6. | ||
+ | ===Presentation of RIMBAA=== | ||
+ | *Rene provides an overview of "where we are" with RIMBAA. The presentation includes an introduction of the Technology Matrix. | ||
+ | *Dale comments on the persistence layer. Hugh talks about there being a "third dimension" (needs follow up from Hugh) | ||
+ | *Dale: what does it mean to be "RIM compliant", do we need/want to define that? Conformance aspect not at the top of the to-do list for the RIMBAA WG. | ||
+ | *Dale: applications have more of a focus on the static model, not on the functional model | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===RS XML-ITS=== | ||
+ | *There is an interest in the creation of an RS XML-ITS. Grahame/Michael van der Zel | ||
+ | *RS/MS cell transition - what's the difference between RS and MS? RS - self discoverable "blob" of RIM based object instances. Theoretically MS is a subset of RS. There are implementation that (wrongly) associate smenatics with clone names, so semantics get lost when transfroming from MS to RS. Current ITS permist MS. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===RIM orientation=== | ||
+ | *RIM was created with an "interoperability mindset". | ||
+ | **Grahame uses the example of the CD datatype - if one were to create the CD datatype with appkication development / persistence in mind it would look totally differently. | ||
+ | **Grahame would also like much mmore normalizations, to re-use communalities between models. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===Reference Implementation=== | ||
+ | *High: two options: maximum reference implementation would need to show "all complexity of a real implementation". At a minunimum: pieces that illustrate parts (the various cell-transitions) in the technology matrix. | ||
+ | *John: how about RIMBAA as a testing framework? Would seem to be a very good application of RIMBAA. | ||
+ | *Rene: Enhance current Java SIG work with CTS, user interfaces, and a module for the use/migration of legacy data? | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===Cell transitions=== | ||
+ | *Document/describe (for all possible cell transations) how those steps could be supported/achieved. Some of them may have reference implementations (or parts thereof) associated with them to illustrate the principle. | ||
+ | |||
==Monday Q4 (15:30-17:00)== | ==Monday Q4 (15:30-17:00)== | ||
− | *Chair (interim, on behalf of Peter Hendler: Rene Spronk, scribe: Michael van der Zel | + | *Chair (interim, on behalf of Peter Hendler): Rene Spronk, scribe: Michael van der Zel |
*Attendees: | *Attendees: | ||
**Amnon Shabo, IBM (Israel) | **Amnon Shabo, IBM (Israel) | ||
Line 30: | Line 54: | ||
**Amit Popat, Epic | **Amit Popat, Epic | ||
**Hugh Glover, Bluewave Informatics (UK) | **Hugh Glover, Bluewave Informatics (UK) | ||
+ | *The minutes from this quarter have been included in the documentation of the discussion of Q3 (see above). | ||
− | + | ==Monday Q6 (19:30-21:00)== | |
Revision as of 22:51, 12 January 2009
Minutes of the RIMBAA WG from the Orlando WGM (Sept. 2008). See also the [agenda for the Orlando WGM].
Contents
Monday Q3 (13:45-15:00)
- Chair (interim, on behalf of Peter Hendler): Rene Spronk, scribe: Michael van der Zel
- Attendees:
- Amnon Shabo, IBM (Israel)
- Mary Desisto, IBM
- John McKim, conmsultant
- Paul J Bayes, Booz Allen Hamilton
- Alex de Jong, Siemens
- Ian Townend, NHS
- Rik Smithies, NHS (UK)
- John Koisch, NCI
- Amit Popat, Epic
- Ilkon Kim, KNU Korea
- Andy Stechischin, consultant
- Grahame Grieve, Kestral
- Russ Sarbora, City of Hope
- Hugh Glover, Bluewave Informatics (UK)
Approval of Minutes
- Approval of the minutes of the last WGM, available at RIMBAA 200809 WGM Minutes
- Approved without objection, 10-0-6.
Presentation of RIMBAA
- Rene provides an overview of "where we are" with RIMBAA. The presentation includes an introduction of the Technology Matrix.
- Dale comments on the persistence layer. Hugh talks about there being a "third dimension" (needs follow up from Hugh)
- Dale: what does it mean to be "RIM compliant", do we need/want to define that? Conformance aspect not at the top of the to-do list for the RIMBAA WG.
- Dale: applications have more of a focus on the static model, not on the functional model
RS XML-ITS
- There is an interest in the creation of an RS XML-ITS. Grahame/Michael van der Zel
- RS/MS cell transition - what's the difference between RS and MS? RS - self discoverable "blob" of RIM based object instances. Theoretically MS is a subset of RS. There are implementation that (wrongly) associate smenatics with clone names, so semantics get lost when transfroming from MS to RS. Current ITS permist MS.
RIM orientation
- RIM was created with an "interoperability mindset".
- Grahame uses the example of the CD datatype - if one were to create the CD datatype with appkication development / persistence in mind it would look totally differently.
- Grahame would also like much mmore normalizations, to re-use communalities between models.
Reference Implementation
- High: two options: maximum reference implementation would need to show "all complexity of a real implementation". At a minunimum: pieces that illustrate parts (the various cell-transitions) in the technology matrix.
- John: how about RIMBAA as a testing framework? Would seem to be a very good application of RIMBAA.
- Rene: Enhance current Java SIG work with CTS, user interfaces, and a module for the use/migration of legacy data?
Cell transitions
- Document/describe (for all possible cell transations) how those steps could be supported/achieved. Some of them may have reference implementations (or parts thereof) associated with them to illustrate the principle.
Monday Q4 (15:30-17:00)
- Chair (interim, on behalf of Peter Hendler): Rene Spronk, scribe: Michael van der Zel
- Attendees:
- Amnon Shabo, IBM (Israel)
- Mary Desisto, IBM
- Paul J Bayes, Booz Allen Hamilton
- Rik Smithies, NHS (UK)
- Amit Popat, Epic
- Hugh Glover, Bluewave Informatics (UK)
- The minutes from this quarter have been included in the documentation of the discussion of Q3 (see above).
Monday Q6 (19:30-21:00)
- ===Future Goals for RIMBAA WG===
- Marketing - Public exposure of successes
- Sharing of experiences and solutions
- e.g. RP/RO more future-proof than MP/MO
- Education - for newbies to RIMBAA
- Make vocab committee aware that OID changes, code removals, are very problematic for RIMBAA applications
- RIM was created with a messaging-mindset. If one views the RIM from an OLTP or DataWarehouse perspective, is there a delta, i.e. are there things that should be changed?
- Connectathon for exchange of data between RIMBAA applications
- Publish informative document best practices going from persistence layer to message/document.