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

Difference between revisions of "20090510 ArB Kyoto minutes"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 25: Line 25:
 
* is RIMBAA in scope? how much?
 
* is RIMBAA in scope? how much?
 
* ballot quality initiative
 
* ballot quality initiative
* paradigms and the future
+
* paradigms and the future - is messaging in the future
* the templates mess
+
* the templates mess - just how should we do templates?
  
 
Agenda reviewed and updated as found on the wiki (Grahame/Patrick Unanimous)
 
Agenda reviewed and updated as found on the wiki (Grahame/Patrick Unanimous)

Revision as of 01:55, 10 May 2009

Present

John Koisch (informal chair)
Patrick Loyd
Ron Parker
Dale Nelson
Michael Van Der Zel
Grahame Grieve (scribe)
Andy Bond

Sun Q1 Minutes

The focus of the week is SAEAF roll out.

Patrick Loyd has been appointed to the position of unofficial sticky situation facilitator (due to the chairs being the primary authors and movers)

Grab bag of issues that ArB members believe we should be addressing:

  • SAEAF roll out
    • Canada has a major new evolution of their architecture. One of the things to be addressed is the evolution of v3 stads suite into SAEAF
  • behavioural model --> contracts
  • tooling implications of SAEAF
  • weigh in on vocab issue with regard to CTS2, and other cross-internal-jurisdictional issues
  • HDF future directions
  • what are our normative artefacts - governance process
  • is RIMBAA in scope? how much?
  • ballot quality initiative
  • paradigms and the future - is messaging in the future
  • the templates mess - just how should we do templates?

Agenda reviewed and updated as found on the wiki (Grahame/Patrick Unanimous)

SAEAF Publishing Report

  • SAEAF has been broken up into 7 sections
  • HDF is going to be repurposed as a SAEAF implementation guide with other content moved into CPP
    • there is still question about how this will actually happen
  • parts of the SAEAF can be regarded as mature documents
  • there are two internal projects officially using the SAEAF: CTS2 and PASS + several external projects (including projects at II4SM, NCI, and Infoway)
    • Mark is not formally aware of these projects - better coordination is needed
    • ArB members are supposed to fill out the Service Specification Stack Matrix Saeaf_specification_stack
    • Mark is getting more issues than traction
    • will be making a strong statement on Wed Q3