Difference between revisions of "Cross-Domain Strategic Planning Work Group Tcon Minutes 2010-10-25"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Chrisdcarr (talk | contribs) |
Chrisdcarr (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
::* Document and ask compliance? | ::* Document and ask compliance? | ||
::* Establish oversight group (like DICOM WG6, HL7 Architecture Review) | ::* Establish oversight group (like DICOM WG6, HL7 Architecture Review) | ||
| − | :::* Could be multiple reviews, each one based on different base standards | + | :::* Could be multiple reviews, each one based on different base standards (this could cause more "silo" issues) |
| + | :* Early cross-domain or central review of proposed work items? | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
* Three major goals | * Three major goals | ||
Revision as of 15:09, 25 October 2010
Attendees
- Chris Carr
- Emmanuel Cordonnier
- Mike Nusbaum
- Kevin O'Donnell
Minutes
- Mike Nusbaum presented the ITI Strategic Planning materials
- Establishes personal liaisons with other domains and process to communicate
- Other domains can submit work requests to ITI for needs they have
- Kevin O'Donnell reviewed Process and IHE Profile Design Principles and Conventions
- Pages intended to guide technical framework development processes
- The ways committees develop profiles has diverged--How to fix?
- Document and ask compliance?
- Establish oversight group (like DICOM WG6, HL7 Architecture Review)
- Could be multiple reviews, each one based on different base standards (this could cause more "silo" issues)
- Early cross-domain or central review of proposed work items?
- Three major goals
- Uniformity of process
- Coordination of work between ITI and clinical specialties: including to reject
- Coordination among clinical specialties