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

20130925 HL7 PLA Meeting

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

HL7 Product Line Architecture – 2013-09-25 Meeting

Return to HL7 Product Line (Family) Architecture Wiki Home Page<br\> Return to HL7 Product Line Architecture Meeting Minutes and Agendas


  • Attila Farkas, CHI
  • Rick Haddorff Mayo
  • Ron Parker Infoway
  • Austin Kreisler SAIC
  • Lynn Laakso scribe

Meeting Logistics

  • Dates: Wednesday Q3 of the Working Group Meeting
  • Time: 13:45 - 15:00 Eastern Time
  • Room: Cambridge B

Q3 Agenda for HL7 Product Line Architecture

  1. Roll Call
  2. Agenda Review - not enough bodies; shall we continue?
  3. BAM Status


Convene 1:52 PM

  1. Agenda Review - not enough bodies; shall we continue? Teasing apart governance and management (if not methodology) of CDA IG.
  2. BAM Status
    • Reviewed current state with Bo, reports Ron. If we had a vehicle to go forward and stand this up, he would be more engaged. Is there a mandate, what is the anticipated acceptance.
    • Need to stop modeling and develop narrative.
    • Ron shows his slides, modified slightly from the TSC presentation.
      • Philosophy and approach from Erl, structure/framework from TOGAF and language from SAIF CD.
      • US Realm Task Force can use this as framing document to stand up the process
      • Document of BAM-lite reviewed and discussed. Need something to also allow those not very familiar e.g. DAF group, with HL7 operations to engage.
      • Need for internal view versus external view with inclusion of proposed governance model up-front and how we got there to follow; Also a summarized version for the external audience.
      • Proposed Management model has elements in the GOM, where EA Mgmt is our PLA group. Role of the core team evolution with FHIR reviewed.
      • Following the business architecture, and establish toe business service contracts, the information architecture naturally will follow the tooling strategy as well as MnM's artifact definition. Other elements of SAIF IG or Tooling strategy becomes items listed as TBD in the document.
      • Organization structure and units section discussed. What if governance and mgmt groups actually govern expert communities? Capability expertise vs definitional expertise. Imagine project driven development with roll on roll off expertise managed as a product portfolio. Discussion ensued on SSD SD units choosing in what kind of function they claim expertise; domain, architecture, and support.
      • Next the BAM Light addresses logical level architecture, processes and flows. Then there are "implementation considerations" where the ArB provides advice and the organization determines the rigor to which the advice is adopted. The ArB is the enterprise methodologist.
      • If we get this right, by the next WGM the room will be packed for the PLA/BAM review.
      • As they continue producing the document need to think about who are its audiences and what it will be used for. Austin's immediate application is for US Realm Task Force. Need also for external things coming in if they can place it in the correct position on the ECCF like the example that Keith used in the Structured Documents WG.
  3. What are we going to do next meeting, next WGM in this quarter - we'll review the document.

Adjourned 3:00 PM