View source for SWF.b FT Evaluation

==Proposal==
The Scheduled Workflow.b profile has been nominated for advancement to Final Text. (Advocate: Steve Nichols)
Per the [[Final Text Process]], <font color="blue">Items in blue text</font> below warrant Committee discussion.

== Technical Committee Checklist ==

* Are all significant CPs against the profile "closed"
::* Yes. Significant CPs identified and addressed. See [ftp://ftp.ihe.net/Radiology/TF_Maintenance/2_Ready%20to%20Publish%20in%20Ballot/]
::* Note <font color="blue">non-critical CPs within the :::::::::[https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1TmSwnn4AIiXqFLc_AtzP0dNd9LUWnA-ZcCjBMKpLzp4/edit?usp=sharing CP Tracking Spreadsheet]?
:::* CP-RAD-224
:::* CP-RAD-228
:::* CP-RAD-232
:::* CP-RAD-257
:::* CP-RAD-299
:::* CP-RAD-343
:::* CP-RAD-353
:::* CP-RAD-354
:::* CP-RAD-422</font>

* Are all significant CPs against the underlying standards "closed"?
::* Yes, DICOM CP1743 in final text
* Have all significant comments been CP'd or rejected?
::* Yes, see [ftp://ftp.ihe.net/Radiology/iherad-2013/Tech_Cmte/Supp%20Development/SWF2/SWF.b_Public_Comment_Consolidated-2013.04.25.xls SWF.b Public Comment Tracker]
* Have all open issues listed in the Supplement been closed?
::* Yes, see [http://ihe.net/uploadedFiles/Documents/Radiology/IHE_RAD_Suppl_SWF.b.pdf SWF.b Supplement]

* Have all significant issues at Connectathon been dealt with?
::* Yes, after checking with Lynn Felhofer, all connectathon issues have been addressed through CPs
* Gather feedback from implementers via a [ftp://ftp.ihe.net/Connectathon/IHE%20Vendor%20Questionnaire%20V0.4.doc formal questionnaire to Connectathon participants]
::* Yes, see above
* Has the Connectathon Project Manager been queried and significant issues addressed?
::* Yes, see above

== Technical Committee Consensus==
:* The Technical Committee agreed to continue with the Final Text Process and continue with an evaluation by the Planning Committee

== Planning Committee Checklist ==

* Has the profile been through a Connectathon in at least two regions?
::* Yes, Korea (no HL7), Europe and North America
::[[File:Swf-bCAT1.PNG|800px|none|CAT results]]
* Has the profile been successfully tested with all actors at least at one Connectathon?
::* Yes, see above
* Have different implementations of each actor in the profile been tested?
::* Yes, see [[:Media:SWF.b.pdf|CAT results extract]]
* Have all the options been tested successfully at at least one Connectathon?
::* Yes, <font color="blue">except for the Enterprise Identity Option</font>
* Are there IHE-provided software testing tools to address all aspects of the profile?
::* Yes, DICOM and HL7v2.5 validators available in gazelle
::* TODO by Lynn: Add tooling limitation
* Have the standards underlying the profile been implemented? In similar use cases? In healthcare? In general IT?
::* Yes, DICOM and HL7 v2.5 are widely implemented <font color="blue">although HL7 v2.3 is also widely adopted. Does this impact the retirement of SWF + PIR?</font>
* (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?)
::* Yes, 12 products in [https://product-registry.ihe.net/PR/pr/search.seam?integrationProfile=314&date=ANY|1573833605834|1573833605834 IHE Product Registry], many others have not registered in the product registry. Also see [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1E5x1HZY9ldOkwEz3v4eSB6gzla98ntP1_nXsHXoW-nQ/edit 2019 IHE Radiology Domain Report]
* Have all issues that may have been raised about the profile been resolved?
::* No issues have been raised.
* Has there been sufficient interest in the profile to generate a one-page [[Profiles|overview of the profile]]
:::* Yes, see [https://wiki.ihe.net/index.php/Scheduled_Workflow.b SWF.b overview]