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

Difference between revisions of "20100119 arb minutes"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(New page: * Authoritative Requirements - SAEAF has to borrow the primacy and process of requirements management from TOGAF * NHIH needs this * For example Interoperability in Gov - Security pol...)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
  
 +
Tuesday Q2 - Government SIG dialogue
  
 +
Wide ranging discussion with these pertinent points
  
 +
* SAEAF focus on Working Interoperabilty backed by the Service Contract is attractive even if the various enterprises have their own Enterprise Architectures based on a different framework.
  
* Authoritative Requirements - SAEAF has to borrow the primacy and process of requirements management from TOGAF  
+
* Authoritative Requirements - SAEAF should borrow the primacy and process of requirements management from TOGAF  
* NHIH needs this
+
* NHIH needs what SAEAF offers.
* For example Interoperability in Gov - Security policies are specified at a physical level - Conformance and Compliance  
+
* For example interoperability in a Gov agency - if an enterprise security policies are specified at a physical level - Conformance and Compliance can help to persuade agreement to participate even if an alternate physical security strategy is proposed
* Authoritative Services that can mitigate among distinct systems of record
+
* Authoritative Services that can mitigate among distinct systems of record = statement that would resonate
 
* Distrust of ArB and SAEAF within HL7 - evaluated as if it is providing benefit immediately - and it's not even complete -  Alpha projects will be helping to finish and inform the process of creating the HL7 Enterprise Architecture Specification.  Beta projects will need to be recruited that can demonstrate that an authoritative requirements driven process can produce a Services Contract with full traceability to the end stage technology binding.
 
* Distrust of ArB and SAEAF within HL7 - evaluated as if it is providing benefit immediately - and it's not even complete -  Alpha projects will be helping to finish and inform the process of creating the HL7 Enterprise Architecture Specification.  Beta projects will need to be recruited that can demonstrate that an authoritative requirements driven process can produce a Services Contract with full traceability to the end stage technology binding.

Revision as of 00:49, 20 January 2010

Tuesday Q2 - Government SIG dialogue

Wide ranging discussion with these pertinent points

  • SAEAF focus on Working Interoperabilty backed by the Service Contract is attractive even if the various enterprises have their own Enterprise Architectures based on a different framework.
  • Authoritative Requirements - SAEAF should borrow the primacy and process of requirements management from TOGAF
  • NHIH needs what SAEAF offers.
  • For example interoperability in a Gov agency - if an enterprise security policies are specified at a physical level - Conformance and Compliance can help to persuade agreement to participate even if an alternate physical security strategy is proposed
  • Authoritative Services that can mitigate among distinct systems of record = statement that would resonate
  • Distrust of ArB and SAEAF within HL7 - evaluated as if it is providing benefit immediately - and it's not even complete - Alpha projects will be helping to finish and inform the process of creating the HL7 Enterprise Architecture Specification. Beta projects will need to be recruited that can demonstrate that an authoritative requirements driven process can produce a Services Contract with full traceability to the end stage technology binding.