Difference between revisions of "20090122 arb telcon minutes"

Latest revision as of 14:49, 22 March 2010

This page categorizes Old Arb minutes.

Architecture Board

January 22, 2009

Attendees

Name	Present	With	Affiliation	E-mail address
Curry, Jane	Yes	ArB	Health Information Strategies	janecurry@healthinfostrategies.com
Grieve, Grahame	?	ArB	Kestral Computing	grahame@kestral.com.au
Hammill, Dave	Yes	Guest	HL7 HQ	dhamill@HL7.org
Julian, Tony	Yes	ArB	Mayo Clinic	ajulian@mayo.edu
Koisch, John	Yes	ArB	NCI	koisch_john@bah.com
Loyd, Patrick	Yes	ArB	Gordon point Informatics LTD.	patrick.loyd@gpinformatics.com
Lynch, Cecil	Yes	ArB	ontoreason LLC	clynch@ontoreason.com
Mead, Charlie	Yes	ArB	Booz Allen Hamilton	charlie.mead@booz.com
Nelson, Dale	Yes	Arb	II4SM	dale@zed-logic.com
Ocasio, Wendell	Yes	ArB	Agilex Technologies	wendell.ocasio@agilex.com
Parker, Ron	?	ArB	CA Infoway	rparker@eastlink.ca
Quinn, John	?	ArB	Health Level Seven, Inc.	jquinn@HL7.org
Shakir, Abdul-Malik	?	ArB	Shakir Consulting	ShakirConsulting@cs.com

Agenda

Call to order
Roll Call
Approval of agenda
Approval of minutes of the Orlando Working Group Meetings
MOU with other SDO;s
State of the SAEAF
State of the BF
- Need for a project tracker
The Grid
Other business, and planning for next meeting
Adjournment

Call to order

The meeting was called to order at 3:00PM U.S. Eastern by chair John Koisch with user:ajulian as scribe.

Roll Call

See Attendees

Approval of agenda

Agenda was approved by affirmation.

Approval of minutes

MMS to approve the minutes of the Orlando WGM

Orlando Thursday Q3-Q4 Minutes

Orlando Tuesday Q4 Minutes

Orlando Sunday Q1-Q2 WGM Minutes

by Jane/Cecil Vote:(7-0-1)

MOU with other SDO;s

Tabled pending information from Abdul-Malik Shakir

State of the SAEAF

Charlie Mead: After going through the slides for 2 tutorials, I am thinking that we decided in principle, the slide deck should be organized the same as the SAEAF. They should be two presentations of the same material. I am two hours from sending it out - sometime tomorrow. Will use the deck as an outline of the SAEAF - smoothing out - incorporating the Behavioral Framework(BF). We are reasonably close to having something. There is a desire to push the SAEAF to a larger audience. John will make sure that Charlie did not mess up the content. Should be out by Wednesday morning of next week.

Jane Curry: The slide about the grid needs work, with commentary about the cells therein.

Charlie Mead: We talked about it, but did not get around to it. There will be one more round of critical changes. We need to clarify it.

Jane Curry: If we don't get those right, the rest does not matter.

Charlie Mead: Maybe what Jane is saying is stronger - not release slide deck until it is reviewed, with time box, done NLT February 5, 2009.

Jane Curry: Clearing my desk so I can concentrate on it.

John Koisch: There has been the usual screaming from the crowd with the dispositions. I have replied that they are all available. We need to post them again.

Tony Julian: We did, yesterday.

Charlie Mead: I sent Tony the matrix, which he posted. Somehow Jason Rock was bringing it up. He said analysis artifacts will not be required because the powerful people in HL7 wont let it happen.

John Koisch: We need to send out an e-mail to the foundation group, and the others where it has been posted.

Tony Julian: I sent it out this morning.

State of the BF

John Koisch: I redid the behavioral framework. We felt it needed to be a separate document.

(Wendell joined)

Wendell Ocasio: What is the argument?

John Koisch: It includes all the pieces of the documents that has not been laid out before, therefore should be included in SAEAF. There are portions of the BF that need to be separate, e.g. patterns. The verbose models would be more palatable to others domain groups.

Wendell Ocasio: Does it have a different governance? What is the bottom line?

John Koisch: After the ARB delivers a good starting point, it needs to stop being a project of the ArB, and needs to be part of InM or MnM.

Wendell Ocasio: If it has different governance it needs to be elsewhere.

Jane Curry: The BF describes design that is different from the base content of the SAEAF. Core principles document explains to the point it does not need to be in SAEAF. BF needs to be embedded in a methodology. As we move forward, finding where this stuff is to be talked about in greater detail.

Charlie Mead: All of these perspectives are right, but the discussion is premature. There is a lot of stuff beside the BF in SAEAF - all of these discussions will be important.

John Koisch: The rest of the update: all of the changes from last week, and the previous weeks, have been rolled in. We need a Gforge project tracker for the BF.

Charlie Mead: Congratulations, the BF has moved forward.

John Koisch: Close but no cigar? Alan said is is much closer than that. I will send out updated copy.

Charlie Mead: There are substantive issues as well as inconsistencies.

John Koisch: Boy is that true. A lot of those are getting take care of.

Jane Curry: We have a new version of the consolidated SAEAF. Should we have a new peer review?

Charlie Mead: Yes, what is the harm?

Jane Curry: None

Charlie Mead: To mollify those who think we are doing things behind closed doors.

Jane Curry: People want a copy passed by them.

John Koisch: The SAEAF and BF with the expectation we are going to meet in April at Harmonization. Going ahead and having it out the next week, and calling for comments is a good thing, and taking the next steps going through a formal review process at the harmonization meeting is a good thing.

Jane Curry: We need to identify the additional work that the ArB needs to do, and feed it into the next rollout planning phase, so everyone knows the dates.

John Koisch: We need to be responsive when people say we are not being open. Charlie will come out with the latest version of the SAEAF, and we will release for internal group, then ask the bigger group for comments by February 5, 2009

Charlie Mead: Any objectives to aligning the deck flow with the document?

Cecil Lynch: No

Charlie Mead: The Deck will then be the logical flow.

John Koisch: Everyone ok with the timeline?

Jane Curry: Wilfred Bonney establishes it. We need an administrator.

Tony Julian: I will be happy to be administrator.

Jane Curry: Anybody who is expected to submit comments must get an Gforge account.

Jane Curry: One form is the Gforge request account, the other is the project set up. Scope statements don't generate a project automatically - we must do it.

Dale Nelson: Is there a step to add someone to the account?

Jane Curry: Wilfred is the only one to set up the account, but an administrator can add other people.

Dale Nelson: Someone in this project needs to take the roll. Tony, sounds like you will do that.

John Koisch: To deal in a different way, Tony will send out location of comments.

Need for a GFORGE project tracker

Tony Julian will establish, and notify ArB of location.

Need for a separate e-mail list

Need for separate meetings at WGM

The Grid

The 'GRID' is located at SAEAF_Constraint_Pattern

Jane Curry: Information at the reference level is not correct. The draft list of artifacts is the name of the cell. We should name the cells by the conformance level/viewpoint. Then any comments for the contents of the cell could be done on the corresponding page.

John Koisch: Charlie, sounds like feedback for your review.

Jane Curry: Artifacts across viewpoints are misleading.

Charlie Mead: Can you send them to me?

Jane Curry: We are going to acknowledge that they are mature. I would rather re-name the cells internals.

Charlie Mead: That fine.

Jane Curry: I will do it.

John Koisch: I sent a page on the definitions of terms, but it does not work out.

Tony Julian: If you need help with wiki formatting, let me know.

John Koisch: OHT is using a different wiki.

Charlie Mead: Who needs standards

John Koisch: Who needs standard making organizations.

John Koisch: Should we wait for the redo until sign-ups are complete?

Jane Curry: I am the only one signed up. I took the easy ones! I should have that done by the end of the day.

John Koisch: This is it for today. Welcome to the new members.

Dale Nelson: For a starting point, is there a particular path of set of readings/tasks/review processes that I or the new members can use to get up to speed?

John Koisch: The best would be to go to the wiki and nose around in that a little bit. We have DMP, but have been focusing on the SAEAF and the BF. I am sending the wiki to the Skype channel. Past that, there is not much, other than diving into the SAEAF and BF documents. Also look at the re-org project, which is outside of our scope;

Jane Curry: New eyes for the ArB wiki and what to retire, what to clarify.

Dale Nelson: A general review process, and acclimation.

Jane Curry: Our general collaboration is the wiki.

John Koisch: We use SKYPE and e-mail.

Adjournment

Motion to adjourn at 3:46pm U.S. Eastern

Tony 20:46, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Difference between revisions of "20090122 arb telcon minutes"

Latest revision as of 14:49, 22 March 2010

Contents

Attendees

Agenda

Call to order

Roll Call

Approval of agenda

Approval of minutes

MOU with other SDO;s

State of the SAEAF

State of the BF

The Grid

Adjournment

Navigation menu

Personal tools

Namespaces

Variants

Views

More

Search

Navigation

groups

meetings

general

Tools

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-'''Architecture and Review Board Meeting Minutes'''
+{{Arb_Old_Minutes}}
+'''Architecture Board'''
 January 22, 2009
-[[Agenda_Minutes|Back to Agenda-minutes]]
 ==Attendees==
 <table border="1">
-<tr><td>Name                </td><td>Present</td><td>With  </td><td>Affiliation</td><td>E-main address</td><tr>
+<tr><td>Name                </td><td>Present</td><td>With  </td><td>Affiliation</td><td>E-mail address</td><tr>
 <tr><td>Curry, Jane         </td><td>Yes</td><td> ArB  </td><td>Health Information Strategies</td><td>janecurry@healthinfostrategies.com</td></tr>
 <tr><td>Grieve, Grahame     </td><td>?</td><td> ArB  </td><td>Kestral Computing</td><td>grahame@kestral.com.au</td></tr>
-<tr><td>Hammill, Dave</td><td>Yes</td><td>Guest </td><td>HL7 HQ</td><td>dhamill@HL7.org</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Hammill, Dave       </td><td>Yes</td><td>Guest </td><td>HL7 HQ</td><td>dhamill@HL7.org</td></tr>
 <tr><td>Julian, Tony        </td><td>Yes</td><td> ArB  </td><td>Mayo Clinic</td><td>ajulian@mayo.edu</td></tr>
 <tr><td>Koisch, John        </td><td>Yes</td><td> ArB  </td><td>NCI</td><td>koisch_john@bah.com</td></tr>
-<tr><td>Loyd, Patrick</td><td>Y</td><td>ARB</td><td>Gordon point Informatics LTD. </td><td>patrick.loyd@gpinformatics.com</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Loyd, Patrick       </td><td>Yes</td><td>ArB</td><td>Gordon point Informatics LTD. </td><td>patrick.loyd@gpinformatics.com</td></tr>
 <tr><td>Lynch, Cecil        </td><td>Yes</td><td> ArB  </td><td>ontoreason LLC</td><td>clynch@ontoreason.com</td></tr>
 <tr><td>Mead, Charlie       </td><td>Yes</td><td> ArB  </td><td>Booz Allen Hamilton</td><td>charlie.mead@booz.com</td></tr>
-<tr><td>Nelson, Dale</td><td>Yes</td><td>Arb </td><td>II4SM</td><td>yogi@jellystonepark.gov</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Nelson, Dale        </td><td>Yes</td><td>Arb </td><td>II4SM</td><td>dale@zed-logic.com</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Ocasio, Wendell     </td><td>Yes</td><td>ArB</td><td>Agilex Technologies</td><td>wendell.ocasio@agilex.com</td></tr>
 <tr><td>Parker, Ron         </td><td>?</td><td> ArB  </td><td>CA Infoway</td><td>rparker@eastlink.ca</td></tr>
 <tr><td>Quinn, John         </td><td>?</td><td> ArB  </td><td>Health Level Seven, Inc.</td><td>jquinn@HL7.org</td></tr>
 <tr><td>Shakir, Abdul-Malik </td><td>?</td><td> ArB  </td><td>Shakir Consulting</td><td>ShakirConsulting@cs.com</td></tr>
+</table>
-<tr><td>Bear, Yogi          </td><td>?</td><td>Guest </td><td>US Dept. Interior, Park Service</td><td>yogi@jellystonepark.gov</td></tr>
+==Agenda==
-</table>
-==Call to order==
-The meeting was called to order at <time> by chair <name> with <name> as scribe.
-==Agenda approval==
-MMS to approve the agend below <name/name> Vote:(0-0-0)
 *Call to order
 *Roll Call
@@ Line 34: / Line 34: @@
 **[[20090114_arb_minutes|Orlando Tuesday Q4 Minutes]]
 **[[20090111_arb_orlando_minutes|Orlando Sunday Q1-Q2 WGM Minutes]]
-*MOU with othere SDO;s
+*MOU with other SDO;s
 *State of the SAEAF
 *State of the BF
@@ Line 41: / Line 41: @@
 *Other business, and planning for next meeting
 *Adjournment
 ==Call to order==
+The meeting was called to order at 3:00PM U.S. Eastern by chair John Koisch with [[user:ajulian]] as scribe.
 ==Roll Call==
+See Attendees
 ==Approval of agenda==
+Agenda was approved by affirmation.
 ==Approval of minutes==
-MMS to approve the minutes of the <meeting> as posted to <posting site> by Jane/Cecil Vote:(7-0-1)
+MMS to approve the minutes of the Orlando WGM
 [[20090115_arb_orlando_minutes|Orlando Thursday Q3-Q4 Minutes]]
 [[20090114_arb_minutes|Orlando Tuesday Q4 Minutes]]
 [[20090111_arb_orlando_minutes|Orlando Sunday Q1-Q2 WGM Minutes]]
-==MOU with othere SDO;s==
+by Jane/Cecil Vote:(7-0-1)
+==MOU with other SDO;s==
 Tabled pending information from Abdul-Malik Shakir
 ==State of the SAEAF==
-CM: After going through the slides for 2 tutorials, I am thinking that we decided in principle, the slide deck should be organized the same as the SAEAF.  They should be two presentations of the same material.  I am two hours from sending it out - sometime tomorrow.  Will use the deck as an outline of the SAEAF - smoothing out - incorporating the Behavioral Framework(BF). We are reasonably close to having something.  There is a desire to push the SAEAF to a larger audience.  John will make sure that Charlie did not mess up the content.  Should be out by Wednesday morning of next week.
-JC: The slide about the grid needs work, with commentary about the cells therein.
+Charlie Mead: After going through the slides for 2 tutorials, I am thinking that we decided in principle, the slide deck should be organized the same as the SAEAF.  They should be two presentations of the same material.  I am two hours from sending it out - sometime tomorrow.  Will use the deck as an outline of the SAEAF - smoothing out - incorporating the Behavioral Framework(BF). We are reasonably close to having something.  There is a desire to push the SAEAF to a larger audience.  John will make sure that Charlie did not mess up the content.  Should be out by Wednesday morning of next week.
-CM: We talked about it, but did not get around to it.  There will be one more round of critical changes.  We need to clarify it.
-JC: If we dont get those right, the rest does not matter.
+Jane Curry: The slide about the grid needs work, with commentary about the cells therein.
-CM: Maybe what Jane is saying is stronger - not release slide deck until it is reviewed, with time box, done NLT February 5, 2009.
-JC: Clearing my desk so I can concentrate on it.
+Charlie Mead: We talked about it, but did not get around to it.  There will be one more round of critical changes.  We need to clarify it.
-JK: There has been the usual screaming from the crowd with the dispositions.  I have replied that they are all available.  We need to post them again.
-TJ: We did, yesterday.
+Jane Curry: If we don't get those right, the rest does not matter.
-CM: I sent Tony the matrix, which he posted.  Somehow Jason Rock was bringing it up.  He said analysis artifacts will not be required because the powerful people in HL7 wont let it happen.
-JK: We need to send out an e-mail to the foundation group, and the others where it has been posted.
+Charlie Mead: Maybe what Jane is saying is stronger - not release slide deck until it is reviewed, with time box, done NLT February 5, 2009.
-TJ: I sent it out this morning.
+Jane Curry: Clearing my desk so I can concentrate on it.
+John Koisch: There has been the usual screaming from the crowd with the dispositions.  I have replied that they are all available.  We need to post them again.
+Tony Julian: We did, yesterday.
+Charlie Mead: I sent Tony the matrix, which he posted.  Somehow Jason Rock was bringing it up.  He said analysis artifacts will not be required because the powerful people in HL7 wont let it happen.
+John Koisch: We need to send out an e-mail to the foundation group, and the others where it has been posted.
+Tony Julian: I sent it out this morning.
 ==State of the BF==
-JK: I redid the behavioral framework.  We felt it needed to be a separate document.
+John Koisch: I redid the behavioral framework.  We felt it needed to be a separate document.
 (Wendell joined)
-W: What is the argument?
-JK: It includes all the pieces of the documents that has not been laid out before, therefore should be included in SAEAF.  There are portions of the BF that need to be separate, e.g. patterns.  The verbose models would be more palatable to othere domain groups.
+Wendell Ocasio: What is the argument?
-W: Does it have a different governance? What is the bottom line?
-JK: After the ARB delivers a good starting point, it needs to stop being a project of the ArB, and needs to be part of InM or MnM.
+John Koisch: It includes all the pieces of the documents that has not been laid out before, therefore should be included in SAEAF.  There are portions of the BF that need to be separate, e.g. patterns.  The verbose models would be more palatable to others domain groups.
-W: If it has different goevenance it needs to be elsewhere.
-JC: The BF describes design that is different from the base content of the SAEAF.  Core principles document explains to the point it does not need to be in SAEAF.  BF needs to be imbeded in a methodology.  As we move forward, finding where this stuff is to be talked about in greater detail.
+Wendell Ocasio: Does it have a different governance? What is the bottom line?
-CM: All of these perspectives are right, but the discussion is premature.  There is a lot of stuff beside the BF in SAEAF - all of these discussions will be important.
-JK: The rest of the update: all of the changes from last week, and the previous weeks, have been rolled in.  We need a Gforge project tracker for the BF.
+John Koisch: After the ARB delivers a good starting point, it needs to stop being a project of the ArB, and needs to be part of InM or MnM.
-CM: Congratulations, the BF has moved forward.
-JK: Close but no cigar? Alan said is is much closer than that.  I will send out updated copy.
+Wendell Ocasio: If it has different governance it needs to be elsewhere.
-CM: There are substantive issues as well as inconsistancies.
-JK: Boy is that true.  A lot of those are getting take care of.
+Jane Curry: The BF describes design that is different from the base content of the SAEAF.  Core principles document explains to the point it does not need to be in SAEAF.  BF needs to be embedded in a methodology.  As we move forward, finding where this stuff is to be talked about in greater detail.
-JC: We have a new version of the consolidated SAEAF. Should we have a new peer review?
-CM: Yes, what is the harm?
+Charlie Mead: All of these perspectives are right, but the discussion is premature.  There is a lot of stuff beside the BF in SAEAF - all of these discussions will be important.
-JC: None
-CM: To mollify those who think we are doing things behind closed doors.
+John Koisch: The rest of the update: all of the changes from last week, and the previous weeks, have been rolled in.  We need a Gforge project tracker for the BF.
-JC: People want a copy passed by them.
-JK: The SAEAF and BF with the expectation we are going to meet in April at Harmonization.  Going ahead and having it out the next week, and calling for comments is a good thing, and taking the next steps going through a formal review process at the harmonization meeting is a good thing.
+Charlie Mead: Congratulations, the BF has moved forward.
-JC: We need to identify the additional work that the ArB needs to do, and feed it into the next rollout planning phase, so everone knows the dates.
+John Koisch: Close but no cigar? Alan said is is much closer than that.  I will send out updated copy.
+Charlie Mead: There are substantive issues as well as inconsistencies.
+John Koisch: Boy is that true.  A lot of those are getting take care of.
+Jane Curry: We have a new version of the consolidated SAEAF. Should we have a new peer review?
+Charlie Mead: Yes, what is the harm?
+Jane Curry: None
+Charlie Mead: To mollify those who think we are doing things behind closed doors.
+Jane Curry: People want a copy passed by them.
+John Koisch: The SAEAF and BF with the expectation we are going to meet in April at Harmonization.  Going ahead and having it out the next week, and calling for comments is a good thing, and taking the next steps going through a formal review process at the harmonization meeting is a good thing.
+Jane Curry: We need to identify the additional work that the ArB needs to do, and feed it into the next rollout planning phase, so everyone knows the dates.
+John Koisch: We need to be responsive when people say we are not being open.  Charlie will come out with the latest version of the SAEAF, and we will release for internal group, then ask the bigger group for comments by February 5, 2009
+Charlie Mead: Any objectives to aligning the deck flow with the document?
+Cecil Lynch: No
+Charlie Mead: The Deck will then be the logical flow.
+John Koisch: Everyone ok with the timeline?
+Jane Curry: Wilfred Bonney establishes it.  We need an administrator.
+Tony Julian: I will be happy to be administrator.
+Jane Curry: Anybody who is expected to submit comments must get an Gforge account.
+Jane Curry: One form is the Gforge request account, the other is the project set up.  Scope statements don't generate a project automatically - we must do it.
+Dale Nelson: Is there a step to add someone to the account?
+Jane Curry: Wilfred is the only one to set up the account, but an administrator can add other people.
+Dale Nelson: Someone in this project needs to take the roll.  Tony, sounds like you will do that.
+John Koisch: To deal in a different way, Tony will send out location of comments.
 *Need for a GFORGE project tracker
   Tony Julian will establish, and notify ArB of location.
 *Need for a separate e-mail list
 *Need for separate meetings at WGM
 ==The Grid==
-[[SAEAF_Constraint_Pattern]]
-==Other business, and planning for next meeting==
+The 'GRID' is located at [[SAEAF_Constraint_Pattern]]
+Jane Curry: Information at the reference level is not correct.  The draft list of artifacts is the name of the cell.  We should name the cells by the conformance level/viewpoint.  Then any comments for the contents of the cell could be done on the corresponding page.
+John Koisch: Charlie, sounds like feedback for your review.
+Jane Curry: Artifacts across viewpoints are misleading.
+Charlie Mead: Can you send them to me?
+Jane Curry: We are going to acknowledge that they are mature. I would rather re-name the cells internals.
+Charlie Mead: That fine.
+Jane Curry: I will do it.
+John Koisch: I sent a page on the definitions of terms, but it does not work out.
+Tony Julian: If you need help with wiki formatting, let me know.
+John Koisch: OHT is using a different wiki.
+Charlie Mead: Who needs standards
+John Koisch: Who needs standard making organizations.
+John Koisch: Should we wait for the redo until sign-ups are complete?
+Jane Curry: I am the only one signed up.  I took the easy ones!  I should have that done by the end of the day.
+John Koisch: This is it for today.  Welcome to the new members.
+Dale Nelson: For a starting point, is there a particular path of set of readings/tasks/review processes that I or the new members can use to get up to speed?
+John Koisch: The best would be to go to the wiki and nose around in that a little bit.  We have DMP, but have been focusing on the SAEAF and the BF.  I am sending the wiki to the Skype channel.  Past that, there is not much, other than diving into the SAEAF and BF documents.  Also look at the re-org project, which is outside of our scope;
+Jane Curry: New eyes for the ArB wiki and what to retire, what to clarify.
+Dale Nelson: A general review process, and acclimation.
+Jane Curry: Our general collaboration is the wiki.
+John Koisch: We use SKYPE and e-mail.
 ==Adjournment==
+Motion to adjourn at 3:46pm U.S. Eastern
+[[User:Ajulian|Tony]] 20:46, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
+[[Category:Arb Old Minutes]]