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

Difference between revisions of "20080715 ARB Jump StartMinutes"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
m
Line 1: Line 1:
 
Minutes:
 
Minutes:
 
The meeting was called to order at 8:30am by John Koisch with Tony Julian as the scribe.
 
The meeting was called to order at 8:30am by John Koisch with Tony Julian as the scribe.
 +
**Attendees: Mead Walker, John Koisch, Tony Julian, Abdul-Malik Shakir, Jane Curry
 +
**Visitors: Alex DeJong, Dave Torok
 
*The agenda [[July2008OutOfCycleMeeting]] posted to the wiki was approved AMS/Tony.
 
*The agenda [[July2008OutOfCycleMeeting]] posted to the wiki was approved AMS/Tony.
  
Line 16: Line 18:
 
*** Interoperability
 
*** Interoperability
 
** <question><EA slide 6>How do we discrimitate between domain solutions and use case solutions.
 
** <question><EA slide 6>How do we discrimitate between domain solutions and use case solutions.
 +
** Alex question: We decided to use RM-ODP to provide the framework for our deliverable.  Each viewpoint can create a core specification, so that when you put them together you get a full specification.
 +
 +
**Slide
 +
  
 
**Governance  
 
**Governance  

Revision as of 13:05, 15 July 2008

Minutes: The meeting was called to order at 8:30am by John Koisch with Tony Julian as the scribe.

    • Attendees: Mead Walker, John Koisch, Tony Julian, Abdul-Malik Shakir, Jane Curry
    • Visitors: Alex DeJong, Dave Torok
  • The agenda July2008OutOfCycleMeeting posted to the wiki was approved AMS/Tony.
  • 8-9 - organization, procedures, etc.
  • 9-10 - Review of Work in June and additional topics for this session:
    • John discussed the HL7 Enterprise Architecture slide deck as ammended during the June Jump-start meeting.
    • John introduced the HL7 EA diagram as part of the discussion.
      • John Quinn and the TSC as directed by the HL7 Board is being pushed to create conformance specifications for HITSP, CEN, and others including SOA.
      • It was discussed that the Work Group is a type of Internal Policy Maker.
    • The goal of the EA is to define the levels of the architecture.(page 3).
    • Mead volunteered to work on a glossary of terms.
      • Integration
      • Intefacting
      • Interoperability
    • <question><EA slide 6>How do we discrimitate between domain solutions and use case solutions.
    • Alex question: We decided to use RM-ODP to provide the framework for our deliverable. Each viewpoint can create a core specification, so that when you put them together you get a full specification.
    • Slide


    • Governance
    • tbBAM
    • Conformance Class Model
    • Dynamic Framework
  • Service Specification Methodology, including sample artifacts roster
  • 10-11 – Top Down Framework ++
    • - Trading Partner Agreements,
    • review and development of ‘bull’s eye’ view of services in an HL7 context, including consequences on the outer rings of the Bulls Eye, including improved presentation that is updated with more current concepts
    • Include Discussion of Deliverables in September (Expectations, Table of Contents, etc.)
  • 11-12 – open discussion with Observers
  • 12-1 – lunch
  • 1-3 – review of SOA TC Dynamic Model proposal and current DM work
  • 3-4 – Discussion of Service Contracts, UPMS
  • 4-5 - Discussion with Observers
  • Optional Topic - Entity, State, Acts, and Services
  • Day 2:
  • 8-10 - Conformance and Compliance, Conformance Models
  • 10-11 – Review of tbBAM Modeling
  • 11-12 – open discussion with Observers
  • 12-1 – lunch
  • 1-3 – Service Specifications, Conformance
  • 3-4 – tbBAM modeling
  • 4-5 – open discussion with Observers
  • Day 3 (1/2 days):
  • 8-9 -- open discussion with Observers
  • 9-10 -- Project and Product Database
  • 10-11 -- wrap up, task assignment, and project plan for intervening 4 weeks until third meeting
  • Lunch (Optional)
  • Afternoon working session (optional)
  • Note that the afternoon sessions on Wednesday may be held more informally, and could be used to wrap up in-process work (tbBAM, implications of other topics, for example)