RIMBAA 200901 WGM Minutes

Minutes of the RIMBAA WG from the Orlando WGM (Sept. 2008). See also the published agenda for the Orlando WGM.

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).

Future Goals for RIMBAA WG

• Marketing - Public exposure of successes
• Sharing of experiences and solutions
• Education - for newbies to RIMBAA
• Publish informative document best practices going from persistence layer to message/document.