Difference between revisions of "ITI Planning - 20190319"

From IHE Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 19: Line 19:
  
 
===Prototype: Call for New Work Item Proposal ===
 
===Prototype: Call for New Work Item Proposal ===
 +
To:
 +
IHE ITI Planning Committee <itiplan@googlegroups.com>,
 +
IHE ITI Technical Committee <ititech@googlegroups.com>,
 +
IHE XDS Implementors <ihe-xds-implementors@googlegroups.com>,
 +
IHE MHD Implementors <ihe-mhd-implementors@googlegroups.com>,
 +
dcc@ihe.net, (domain coordination committee)
 +
gdc@ihe.net (global deployment committee co-chairs)
  
−
The ITI domain will be using a continuous development process this year, rather than a classic 18 month cycle. This opens up more opportunity for new work item proposals to start and finish at specific points in time over the year. All new work items must still follow the strict governance that IHE has used for 20+ years, the only thing to change is that ITI is more open to start time, and duration. With a continuous development process the ITI committees will be focused more on quality and less focused on meeting a specific calendar deadline.
+
ITI is using a continuous development process https://wiki.ihe.net/index.php/ITI_Continuous_Development
−
 
 
−
IHE domains typically only have a single point in time for new work items each year. This leads to the perception that IHE is not responsive, and places strains on our committees, contractors, and communities. The continuous development model allows new work items to be started at any point in the year, provided the committee has bandwidth available.  There are now 4 equally spaced face-to-face meetings where milestones can be assessed on all actively developing projects. Any project meeting the milestone quality may progress through one or more milestones at these face-to-face meetings.
 
−
 
 
−
Thus at the end of the face-to-face meeting an assessment of available resources will be determined. Based on the available free resources, the ITI Technical Committee will look to the current prioritized backlog of potential new work items.
 
−
 
 
−
Now is the time to get your new work item proposals submitted to the ITI Planning committee. The Planning Committee will assist with proper format and focus of the new work item proposal. The new work item proposal needs to focus on defining the Interoperability Problem that needs to be solved. It should not focus on the solution, although it is fine to include a solution proposal. The Planning committee will evaluate the appropriateness of the new work item proposal, and may redirect the proposal to a more appropriate domain or workgroup. Those accepted for ITI will then be prioritized based on the market need. This is the prioritized list that the ITI Technical Committee will use.
 
  
 
New Work Item proposals will be evaluated every month at the monthly ITI Planning Committee meeting:
 
New Work Item proposals will be evaluated every month at the monthly ITI Planning Committee meeting:
Line 35: Line 36:
 
* JohnMoehrke@gmail.com
 
* JohnMoehrke@gmail.com
  
 +
----------------------------------------------------
 +
Historic thoughts that never got proposed
 +
The following is a list of things that have been spoken about, but for which we have not received a formal new work item proposal
 +
 +
* XDM on FHIR -- usecases from XDM, but where the encoding of the metadata is using FHIR structure
 +
* MHD asynchronous -- usecases from MHD, but where there is a need for asynchronous. Such as MHD as an API to XCA where the asynchronous MHD would allow for non-blocking
 +
* FHIR Client security -- package up the requirements for a FHIR Client to be secure. Subset of ATNA without client side cert + IUA +???
 +
* SMART-on-FHIR usecases -- authorization of application space, specification of OAuth scope, specification of OAuth interaction (beyond IUA has today)
 +
* FHIR Maturity for MHD and other profiles -- some of the FHIR resources are not being naturally matured, where as IHE may be the best organization to focus on that (e.g. MHD)
 +
* MHD On-Demand -- document how MHD would support On-Demand -- where backend is XDS, where backend is XCA, where backend is native FHIR
 +
* PAM on FHIR -- all of the PAM use-cases in FHIR form
 +
* Re-Document ITI-18 -- simplify, clarify, various items Thing ONE
 +
* Work more closely with PCC and QRPH to align their newest work with ITI
 +
* Profiling of CDS-hooks for specific clinical usecases. Or does this become a clinical domain responsibility (PCC, etc)
 +
* Overall alignment of our FHIR profiles with Argonaut and/or Da Vinci
 +
* Point-of-Care Consent mechanism to XCPD and XCA in support of Sequoia Project
 +
* and many many more...
 +
 +
----------------------------------------------------
 
References
 
References
 
* Details on ITI Continuous Development   
 
* Details on ITI Continuous Development   
Line 40: Line 60:
 
* New Work Item template
 
* New Work Item template
 
** https://wiki.ihe.net/index.php/Call_for_Profile_Proposals
 
** https://wiki.ihe.net/index.php/Call_for_Profile_Proposals
 +
* Currently accepted proposals for consideration at future selection for work
 +
** Trello https://trello.com/b/IH4FPDhN/ihe-iti-planning-proposalssco
 +
** Wiki https://wiki.ihe.net/index.php/ITI_2019_Backlog
  
 
==Minutes==
 
==Minutes==
 +
attendance: Charles, Chris Melo, Holly Miller, Joe Lamy, Luke Duncan, Sylvie Colas, John Moehrke
 +
 +
ITI Plan minutes
 +
* Umbrto represented ITI at IHE Board (John was present for 30 minutes)
 +
** proposal to meet at EU Connectathon, was not accepted as face-to-face
 +
** certification of IHE-Professionals in Ren?
 +
*** understand process, terminology of IHE profiles, profile combination, integration statements, CP process
 +
*** exam is written -- IHE Foundation Exam
 +
*** sylibus about to be approved
 +
*** may in the future have domain specific expertise
 +
* ITI report will be presented at next
 +
 +
SNIF
 +
* Check with Mauro
 +
* need an advocate
 +
* need input on current market need
 +
 +
MU re-doc
 +
* check with Mauro
 +
* need proposal submitted
 +
 +
Reviewed and updated 'call' for new work item proposals (see below)
 +
 +
gdc -- co-chaired by Mike Nusbaum, Jurgen Brandstatter
 +
* have a meeting April 3rd
 +
* https://wiki.ihe.net/index.php/Global_Deployment_Coordination_Committee
 +
* ACTION: John to send new-work-item-proposal email to Mike and Jurgen asking them to forward to their deployment committees.
 +
 +
ACTION: John to send a message to DCC asking for ITI liaisons
 +
 +
Reviewed and updated [[ITI Strategy and Liaison Activity]]
 +
 +
ACTION: Charles to send to the ITI list a white paper written by IHE on AS4
 +
 +
ACTION: John to contact Mauro to see if a 5 minute webinar can be done on NPFS

Latest revision as of 12:24, 19 March 2019

back ITI Planning Committee 2018/2019 Meetings

Location

To join this meeting

Time 11:00 am - 12:30 pm Monthly on the third Tuesday 

Go to https://himss.webex.com/himss/j.php?MTID=m7179c542959fd34650d684394fe01ff0

Agenda

Prototype: Call for New Work Item Proposal

To: 

IHE ITI Planning Committee <itiplan@googlegroups.com>,
IHE ITI Technical Committee <ititech@googlegroups.com>,
IHE XDS Implementors <ihe-xds-implementors@googlegroups.com>,
IHE MHD Implementors <ihe-mhd-implementors@googlegroups.com>,
dcc@ihe.net, (domain coordination committee)
gdc@ihe.net (global deployment committee co-chairs)

ITI is using a continuous development process https://wiki.ihe.net/index.php/ITI_Continuous_Development

New Work Item proposals will be evaluated every month at the monthly ITI Planning Committee meeting: 

   https://wiki.ihe.net/index.php/ITI_Planning_Committee_2018/2019_Meetings#ITI_Planning_t-con

Please submit your new work item proposals to the co-chairs of ITI Planning:

  • Sylvie.COLAS@sante.gouv.fr
  • JohnMoehrke@gmail.com

Historic thoughts that never got proposed The following is a list of things that have been spoken about, but for which we have not received a formal new work item proposal

  • XDM on FHIR -- usecases from XDM, but where the encoding of the metadata is using FHIR structure
  • MHD asynchronous -- usecases from MHD, but where there is a need for asynchronous. Such as MHD as an API to XCA where the asynchronous MHD would allow for non-blocking
  • FHIR Client security -- package up the requirements for a FHIR Client to be secure. Subset of ATNA without client side cert + IUA +???
  • SMART-on-FHIR usecases -- authorization of application space, specification of OAuth scope, specification of OAuth interaction (beyond IUA has today)
  • FHIR Maturity for MHD and other profiles -- some of the FHIR resources are not being naturally matured, where as IHE may be the best organization to focus on that (e.g. MHD)
  • MHD On-Demand -- document how MHD would support On-Demand -- where backend is XDS, where backend is XCA, where backend is native FHIR
  • PAM on FHIR -- all of the PAM use-cases in FHIR form
  • Re-Document ITI-18 -- simplify, clarify, various items Thing ONE
  • Work more closely with PCC and QRPH to align their newest work with ITI
  • Profiling of CDS-hooks for specific clinical usecases. Or does this become a clinical domain responsibility (PCC, etc)
  • Overall alignment of our FHIR profiles with Argonaut and/or Da Vinci
  • Point-of-Care Consent mechanism to XCPD and XCA in support of Sequoia Project
  • and many many more...

References

Minutes

attendance: Charles, Chris Melo, Holly Miller, Joe Lamy, Luke Duncan, Sylvie Colas, John Moehrke

ITI Plan minutes

  • Umbrto represented ITI at IHE Board (John was present for 30 minutes)
    • proposal to meet at EU Connectathon, was not accepted as face-to-face
    • certification of IHE-Professionals in Ren?
      • understand process, terminology of IHE profiles, profile combination, integration statements, CP process
      • exam is written -- IHE Foundation Exam
      • sylibus about to be approved
      • may in the future have domain specific expertise
  • ITI report will be presented at next

SNIF

  • Check with Mauro
  • need an advocate
  • need input on current market need

MU re-doc

  • check with Mauro
  • need proposal submitted

Reviewed and updated 'call' for new work item proposals (see below)

gdc -- co-chaired by Mike Nusbaum, Jurgen Brandstatter

ACTION: John to send a message to DCC asking for ITI liaisons

Reviewed and updated ITI Strategy and Liaison Activity

ACTION: Charles to send to the ITI list a white paper written by IHE on AS4

ACTION: John to contact Mauro to see if a 5 minute webinar can be done on NPFS

Retrieved from "http://wiki.ihe.net/index.php?title=ITI_Planning_-_20190319&oldid=114512"