2009-04-21 EA IP Advisory Group Call Minutes

TSC EA IP Advisory Group

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 at 3 PM EDT (US Eastern Daylight Time, GMT -5)
To participate, dial 770-657-9270 and enter pass code 124466#
GoToMeeting at https://www.gotomeeting.com/join/563682304
GoToMeeting ID: 563-682-304

back to EA IP Meeting Agenda and Minutes

Agenda

• Meeting Goal: To assess Alpha Project engagement approach

1. Roll call:
   • Chair: Marc Koehn (Marc.Koehn@GPInformatics.com)
   • Nancy Orvis (nancy.orvis@tma.osd.mil)
   • Ken Rubin (ken.rubin@eds.com)
   • Ed Tripp (Edward.tripp@estripp.com)
   • Igor Sirkovich (Igor.Sirkovich@Ontario.ca)
   • Lynn Laakso, HQ - scribe (lynn@hl7.org)
2. Agenda Review
   • confirm issues with prior notes
   • update on 2Q participation with ArB
   • who will be in Kyoto – schedule f2f
   • feedback on topics
3. Agenda Items
   • Comments re: previous meeting and notes – none noted
   • Update on recent Project Team activities:
     • 2Q meeting with ArB OOC
     • Prior to meeting, had started analysis of What does org look like now; processes, products produced. Have not put framework together but have lots of material.
     • How to move forward and in what way.
     • Met with ArB; no concrete timelines from ArB yet. Feel they should run actual projects through a process to validate SAEAF. ArB is more heads-down on producing materials rather than providing guidance on artifacts, quality criteria or governance and review.
     • Strong alignment to our alpha project considerations. Getting them launched is our next priority. Established a roadmap more defined, with milestones – to be translated to Visio after Marc gets back from on the road.
     • Content and process outputs of alpha projects: CTS2, PASS, others. Waiting for guidance. Determining charters, how to engage, etc. Need feedback on draft project considerations.
     • Next steps: put out a Roadmap, detailing activities especially related to alpha project, direction of what to do, and put a charter project together.
     • ArB working 4x4 matrix from SAEAF document to be elaborated on each section to identify what documents are produced and how do they fit together. Candidate quality criteria for review of projects to be developed.
     • ACTION ITEM: Marc to follow up with scribe from the meeting on the minutes; Q1 and Q2 are posted but Q3 and Q4 are not.
   • Who will be in Kyoto?
     • Ken will. Ed, Igor and Nancy will not.
     • is there a better way to leverage your time? Ken says last two or three weeks not indicative (HIMSS); Ed agrees.
   • Marc and Lynn to revise and summarize threads and send it out for everyone to review.
     • Nancy would like to see a precise scope of what this enterprise architecture is going to do. Scope statement for phase 1 to plan activities toward implementation. What are the decision practices to be changed, new artifacts to be dealt with, requirements for new tooling to support moving products towards specifications and standards? Nancy refers to memo for call to participation – where is the enterprise architecture being developed? SAEAF is only a framework; there’s nothing about general HL7 processes. Need to address the business architecture. Looking for the bottom up approach in alpha projects; need to do some top-down work – existing business model. Need a picture to describe that gap. Are we going to have an implementation project before we build the architecture? What are the set of activities to cause the enterprise architecture to be built? This should run concurrently with the alpha projects.
     • Ken suggest he, Marc and Nancy have some time on another call to put a straw man together for Kyoto. Nancy suggests 2 PM on Friday. Lynn to set up a Dimdim for materials and conference call info.
   • Marc notes risks with existing projects in-process e.g. CDA R3 that will create additional legacy if they do not have a compatibility with SAEAF.