Final Text Process: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 09:31, 12 June 2007

The Technical Committee, at some point, decides that a Trial Implementation supplement is ready for consideration as a Final Text candidate.

Announce intention to review for Final Text
- Consider doing this around the time of Public Comment for other Profiles
Run down the checklist for each profile
- Are all significant CPs against the profile "closed"?
- Have all significant comments been CP'd or rejected?
- Have all significant issues at Connectathon been dealt with?
  - Gather feedback from implementers via a formal questionnaire to Connectathon participants
- Did the Connectathon Project Managers have no significant issues found in testing?

The Planning Committee votes on the proposal from the Tech Cmte to Final Text

Put Final Text Decision on the planning committee agenda
- Consider doing this a couple months before new TF version will be released
Run down the checklist for each profile
- Has the profile been through a Connectathon in at least two regions?
- Has the profile been successfully tested with all actors at least at one Connectathon?
- Have different implementations of each actor in the profile been tested?
- Have all the options been tested successfully at at least one Connectathon?
- Are there IHE-provided software testing tools to address all aspects of the profile?
- Have the standards underlying the profile been implemented? In similar use cases? In healthcare? In general IT?
- (Do you have concrete reason to believe that this works robustly in the Real World) / (Are any products available for purchase that implement the profile?)
- Have all issues that may have been raised about the profile been resolved?
- Have all CPs against the profile been addressed?
Debate exceptions (failure of the above is cause for discussion)
Hold and record formal vote
Communicate results to TC

The Technical Committee completes the Final Text and/or folds it into the Tech Framework:

The Secretariat publishes the updated Technical Framework

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 *** Gather feedback from implementers via a [ftp://ftp.ihe.net/Connectathon/IHE%20Vendor%20Questionnaire%20V0.4.doc formal questionnaire to Connectathon participants]
 ** Did the Connectathon Project Managers have no significant issues found in testing?
 The Planning Committee votes on the proposal from the Tech Cmte to Final Text
@@ Line 19: / Line 20: @@
 ** Are there IHE-provided software testing tools to address all aspects of the profile?
 ** Have the standards underlying the profile been implemented? In similar use cases? In healthcare? In general IT?
-** (Do you have concrete reason to believe that this works robustly in the Real World)(Are any products available for purchase that implement the profile?)
+** (Do you have concrete reason to believe that this works robustly in the Real World) / (Are any products available for purchase that implement the profile?)
 ** Have all issues that may have been raised about the profile been resolved?
 ** Have all CPs against the profile been addressed?
@@ Line 34: / Line 35: @@
 * Publish Final Text on ihe.net
 * Announce publication
-'''''<Discuss whether you can put an Integration Statement up for a TI Profile?  Would need to review and either remove IS or change implementation based on Final Text>'''''