ScopeVision2008JumpStartProject

<SCOPE/VISION STATEMENT FOR JUMPSTART PROJECT>

Realizing the fundamental correctness of Mead’s and Ron’s statements yesterday that my original portrayal of the JumpStart project could fairly easily be perceived as a siloed approach to services only (and the responsibility for that polarization is entirely mine as I’m certain that JohnQ wants – as I tried to explain yesterday in softening my original statement – that the deliverables from this project serve several purposes including:

a) internal message to HL7 that services are, indeed, one of the three HL7 Interoperability Paradigms with first-class citizenship beside documents and messages;

b) external message to the community outside of HL7 that HL7 does, in fact, consider SOA a first-class interoperability paradigm and recognizes the importance of our standards/specifications having a relevant position in that context; and

c) having the draft enterprise architecture specification that we develop between now and September being a significant piece of (piece of the process of developing) an HL7 Enterprise Architecture Specification which will, in the end, fully integrate our three interoperability paradigms into a single coherent specification while at the same time recognizing the various aspects of each of the three interoperability paradigms.

Having said that, the scope of the JumpStart project is:

To develop a candidate enterprise architecture specification for HL7 that specifically focuses on the development of HL7 specifications that can be applied in an SOA context. In particular, the project should focus on developing the following draft artifacts:

1. Organizational structures, processes, frameworks, governance etc. required to produce SOA-compliant service specifications which would be balloted and released by HL7 in the same manner as specifications based on the other HL7 Interoperability paradigms are produced and released today. (We have been referring to this artifact as the ‘tbBAM.’)

2. Provide a clear understanding to the HL7 BoD, TSC, and membership at large as to how the EA/tbBAM defined in #1 utilizes existing HL7 materials as appropriate, e.g. the RIM, existing DMIMs or RMIMs or message specifications, data type specification, CDA, etc.

3. When appropriate – e.g. for the Dynamic Framework – develop additional draft artifacts as needed to support service specification in all of the domains-of-interest to HL7.

4. Provide a set of references of relevant industry SOA work that influenced the ArB’s work and that the ArB feels should be considered by HL7 going forward in an SOA context either in terms of incorporating the materials or formally working with the appropriate organizations, e.g. OASIS SOA specification, CBDIC service taxonomy, HSSP process, etc.

NOTE: The above assumes that the term ‘SOA’ is an <<architectural>> and <<not>> a <<technology>> construct, i.e. the term ‘SOA’ does <<not>> automatically dictate a particular implementation strategy such as web services,etc.

</SCOPE/VISION STATEMENT FOR JUMPSTART PROJECT>