Difference between revisions of "SWF.b FT Evaluation"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Stevenichols (talk | contribs) |
Stevenichols (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
* Has the profile been through a Connectathon in at least two regions? | * Has the profile been through a Connectathon in at least two regions? | ||
::* Yes, Korea, Europe and North America | ::* Yes, Korea, Europe and North America | ||
| − | ::[[File:Swf-bCAT1.PNG |Image: | + | ::[[File:Swf-bCAT1.PNG |Image:20 pixels]] |
* Has the profile been successfully tested with all actors at least at one Connectathon? | * Has the profile been successfully tested with all actors at least at one Connectathon? | ||
::* Yes | ::* Yes | ||
Revision as of 10:37, 15 November 2019
Proposal
The Scheduled Workflow.b profile has been nominated for advancement to Final Text. (Advocate: Steve Nichols) Per the Final Text Process, Items in blue text below warrant Committee discussion.
Technical Committee Checklist
- Are all significant CPs against the profile "closed"
- Yes, however, do we need to update notes and status of SWF/SWF.b CP in the 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
- 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 SWF.b Public Comment Tracker
- Have all open issues listed in the Supplement been closed?
- Yes, see 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 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, Europe and North America
- Has the profile been successfully tested with all actors at least at one Connectathon?
- Yes
- Have different implementations of each actor in the profile been tested?
- Yes
- Have all the options been tested successfully at at least one Connectathon?
- Yes
- 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?
- Yes
- Has there been sufficient interest in the profile to generate a one-page overview of the profile