Healthcare Services Specification Project (HSSP)
HL7 SOA SIG Conference Minutes
Atlanta: September 17 – 20, 2007
Present: (Apologies for any misspelling of names)
(Light shading – HSSP had joint session hosted by other committee)
/ Mon / Tue / Wed / Thu /Attendee / Affiliation/email / Q3 / Q4 / Q1 / Q2 / Q3 / Q4 / Q1 / Q2 / Q3 / Q4 / Q1 / Q2 / Q3 / Q4 /
Alan Honey
(co-chair) / Kaiser Permanente / X / X / X / X / X / X / X / X / X / X
John Koisch
(co-chair) / OCTL Consulting / VHA / X / X / X / X / X / X / X / X
Brad Lund
(co-chair) / Intel / X / X / X / X
Ken Rubin
(co-chair) / EDS / X / X / X / X / X / X / X / X / X / X
Steve Hufnagel / DoD / X / X / X / X / X / X / X
Don Jorgenson / Inpriva / X / X
Roberto Ruggeri / Microsoft / X / X
Russ Hamm / Mayo / X
Ann Wrightson / CSW (UK) / X / X / X / X / X / X
Charlie Mead / NCI/BAH / X
Max Walker / DHS (Victoria State) / X / X
Zhijing Liu / Siemens / X / X
Galen Mulrooney / VHA / X / X / X / X / X
Richard Dixon Hughes / CDH4 / X
John Moehrke / GE Healthcare / X / X
Masaharu Obayashi / Kanrikogaku Ltd / X / X / X
Fredrik Strom / HL7 Sweden ( ) / X
Gary Matulis / NE University () / X
Geoffrey Roberts / Qinetiq / X / X / X / X / X / X / X / X / X / X
Dennis Grolta / Canada Health Infoway / X
Alean Kirnak / Software Partners / X / X / X / X / X / X
Lee Coller / Oracle / X / X
Nick Radov / / X / X
V Jagannatha / / X / X
Perry Mar / Partners Healthcare / X / X
Alan Roush / / X
Jameson Porter / Jameson.Porter@vouchers?.it.edu / X
Bill Friggle / Sanofi Aventis / X
Jill Kaufman / IBM / X
Jennifer Puyenbrook / SAIC / X
Ed Larsen / / X
Cecile Pistre / Sanofi Aventis / X
Smruti Kalgankar / CDC / X / X / X
Frieda Hall / VHA / X
Ron Parker / Canada Health Infoway / X
Mark Shafarman / / X
Senthil Nachimuthu / 3M / X
Dave Carlson / / X
GB Kesarinuth / CDC / X / X
Tim Williams / / X
David Tao / / X
Total attendees / 41 / 8 / 12 / 13 / 13 / 8 / 9 / 10 / 16 / 13 / 10
Agenda:
Date / Time / Event9/17 / AM / Q1 / Not Meeting
Monday / Q2 / Not Meeting
PM / Q3 / Introduction: standard overview and intro for newcomers etc.
- Project Overview / Mission and Charter
- Current Project Status
- Question and Answer / Open Forum
Q4 / Hosted by EHR TC
9/18 / AM / Q1 / Reference Architecture work session / Brainstorming
Tuesday / Q2 / Produce Initial Draft Reference Architecture Document, also review and dispensation
PM / Q3 / Interoperability Paradigms (and other items - Hosted by INM)
Q4 / Discussion on templates and use in Services (Hosting Templates Sig) + Template Registry / Registry Management Discussion
9/19 / AM / Q1 / SOA Interoperability Paradigm
Wednesday / Q2 / Education / Communication / Event Planning
PM / Q3 / OMG RFP Submissions status / updates / preparation for Jacksonville OMG meeting (EIS, RLUS)
Q4 / SFM Status (Security, Provider, CRFQ)
9/20 / AM / Q1 / Dynamic Model and Interoperability Paradigms (Joint MnM, INM, SOA, ITS - Hosted by INM or MnM)
Thursday / Q2 / Review of CTS II SFM and vote to issue (Hosting Vocab)
PM / Q3 / HSSP Roadmap Review and Dispensation
Q4 / Hands-on Work session (Roadmap / Ref Architecture continued)
Notes:
Note. The following does not contain formal “minutes”. This is an abbreviated summary of discussions. Any specific actions or votes are however recorded formally.
Monday
Q3
KR gave the project overview, charter, principles, tour of Wiki etc. Reviewed agenda for the meeting.
Motion:
JK: “Amend Decision making practices so that minutes may be posted exclusively to the Wiki and notifications sent to the Wiki and to the list server”. AH seconds.
Note issued that we will vote on Tue Q1.
Q4
Hosted by EHR.
(John Koisch presented status of SOA SIG work to EHR, and Dipak Kalra presented current plans for CEN to include RLUS profile in 13606.)
Tuesday
Q1
Vote on motion above on Decision Making practices: Passed 7-1-0.
Reference Architecture:
John Koisch gave overview of the project background. Service Interoperability Profile project (Koisch/Kelly) led to need for resolving architecture issues. So Reference Architecture work was initiated. VA/DoD have already produced a fair amount of this working on their own which can be used to provide a basis.
Important to articulate objectives and value - KR
Maybe 2 different documents - AW
Maybe a SOA alternative to a HITSP use case which as been based on more traditional terminology. (AW)
AW presented proposed new structure for Reference Architecture.
Brainstormed objectives and guidelines.
Decided that there were really three separate deliverables: Core principles and rationale, Reference Architecture and Implementation Guide.
Q2
Continued discussion on Reference Architecture.
Split into two groups: brainstormed separately and then presented:
- Implementation Guide: purpose is to demonstrate use of reference architecture. Ideas were brainstormed. Ann Wrightson will take initial lead to write straw man document.
- Reference Architecture: Purpose is to define the overall framework and taxonomy of services. Discussion focused on high level methodology steps that will be used to demonstrate the framework. Steve H and John K will continue to take the lead on this document.
The core principles and rationale will be developed in parallel based on extracts from the other two deliverables.
Q3
Hosted by INM. See INM Minutes.
John Koisch presented proposal for Interoperability Paradigms. Motions were passed unanimously to recommend to MnM the definition of interoperability paradigms in the HDF.
Q4
Discussed Interoperability Paradigms (post mortem from Q3). Reviewed WS-CDL.
Templates Registry discussion: RLUS (and other Service specifications) have identified the need for semantic signifiers, for which templates can be used. We need a registry of them (templates – version number, contents, name etc). Need to resolve where will we store them, and how to manage them. Wanted to use the registry as a test case in advance of defining a standard, since we don’t know what we don’t know. Tracking and storing the static models is not trivial, e.g. for VA.
Outlined and discussed proposed project charter for Template Registry. Motion: John Koisch, second: Ann Wrightson “This group (SOA SIG and representatives from Templates SIG) endorses the elaboration of the Project Scope as initially defined in this quarter”. Passed 7-2-0.
Galen Mulrooney to issue document on list server.
Wednesday
Q1
Service Interoperability Paradigm.
Brainstormed ideas for the evening BOF.
Q2
Education discussion.
HL7 Marketing program, looking for a set of presentations for external conferences etc.
Create annual “Ambassadors” for each working group to give specific presentations.
- Technical
- Standards (CDA, CCD)
- Clinicians
Looking to create a standard template, business benefits, description etc.
Want an initial version for January WGM.
SOA SIG agreed to work on the initial presentation focused on SOA.
Conference:
2 years ago held workshop on SOA in Healthcare in Arlington. Focused on organizations doing SOA in healthcare, not on standards. Mainly invited speakers on their actual work.
Looking to repeat, in US, Late Q2, early Q3 2008. Look for sponsor organization. Look to go where healthcare is big, e.g. Chicago, Boston, research triangle. Favorite is Chicago due to proximity of medical schools and group.
Joint OMG-HL7 event.
Tracks –
Day 1 – Executive summit, three tracks, business value, ROI etc, business track, architecture.
Days 2 and 3 – Two tracks – Tech immersion, Business Oriented.
Possible 1 or 2 day immersion seminar – workshop.
Need place, format and sponsorship.
Aim is to go after a different audience, those not playing in standards currently…providers, payers etc.
Needs 3 days to enable European travel.
Aims:
- Why do I care, what do I get?
- What do I do?
- Why interoperate?
- Influence Procurement
Execs – influence to facilitate adoption of SOA and procurement. Strategy and Value
Business – enhance ability to think SOA. Strategy and method.
Technical – take fear out of SOA, help educate on WS NE SOA, also semantically rich SOA vs wire format and how it works in healthcare, and need for health industry standard services. Tools and method.
Focus needs to be on real experiences, what has worked and what has not.
Lessons learned etc.
Consider Public Healthcare also.
All - Return to organizations and identify the needs.
Joint HL7 – OMG sponsorship.
Jill K to explore options within HL7 for involvement, sponsoring or whatever….
Bi-weekly meetings. Initial leads:
- Technical Immersion track - JK
- Architecture - KR
- Business track (2 days) – AW
- Executive track (1 day) - BL
(focus of material is different)
Aim for end Oct – for agenda and good idea of speakers.
Timeline:
End Sept – 1st cut – topics, candidate list of orgs/speakers, nominal schedule
End Oct – venue (provisional), couple of keynote speakers. An agenda to be used for Marketing.
Brad – to pursue sponsors… looking for 25K. Number to be confirmed by OMG next week, more would enable additional funding for speakers etc. Speakers get free conference, and some travel expense for certain speakers.
Maybe include panel and/or debates.
Venues: Chicago, Boston, California,
Publications/Communities for marketing: Government Health IT, Health Informatics Societies (HISA, AMIA etc), Healthcare IT, ACE/ACHE (Assoc Healthcare Executives),
Part of initial drafts – September – include shortlist of venues for advertising etc.
Q3
Lack of an OMG template was an issue.
Questions for OMG Meeting:
1. We can work on some boilerplate for reuse across future tech specs.
2. What should new timeline be?
3. Suggested a BOF at next HL7 Meeting for peer review
4. Look at profiles for functional consistency.
Good lesson: Submitters working together and using existing material.
Q4
CRFQ – No representation in the session, but reported to have dedicated resources and progressing well and potential submitters identified.
PASS – Don J. Don presented update. Aiming to have some transport security information ballot.
Provider and Services Directory – Max presented details of HSD (Human Services Directory)
Requested assistance and use cases. Aiming for April 2008 ballot.
Thursday
Q1
Hosted by MnM/InM.
Agreement reached across all groups to pursue Interoperability Paradigm approach.
Q2
CTS II
Russ Hamm gave overview of CTS II. Project reinstated during summer and objectives set. Details on Wiki.
Aiming to do work in several (three probably) phases: from Query, mapping and authoring, terminology classification through to Inferencing. How do we version things? To what extent do we need to define the model for phase 3 in phase 1?
Several options, multiple SFMs, multiple RFPs etc. Referenced table in SDF for further investigation.
Discussed several other questions on the emerging spec, e.g. separation of security / access.
May ballot first phase in this cycle, yet TBD.
CRFQ
Several main issues resolved. Core participants down to 5 organizations. After some hesitation, RCRIM have approved that first version of SFM to ballot in this cycle. However, several do not understand it and may stop things if they do not. Need some explanation of process and quality checks, Ken or John to take RCRIM through this, possibly in a mock peer review.
Action: SOA Co-chairs to send mail to RCRIM co-chairs – to show them quality points to help them prepare for SFM ballot / reviews.
Need “simple” guide for specifying services. Action for AH – Produce a simple guide for specifying services.
(Note – separation of Business Process from interfaces)
Q3
Map HDF Quality points against ours.
Motion: KR, AW second – “Baseline the HSSP Roadmap as v1.0 (subject to changes agreed in this session)”
9-0-0
Ann – Demographics: MIM in UK in next release cycle will have a set of functions with demographics. Could be used a basis for an SFM? Ken recommended asking around to see if anyone would lead it.
Quality points: Approach:
1. Review HDF and identify list of Quality points (KR)
2. Then work through the SSF and do the gap analysis (AH)
3. Post list out for comment. (AH)
4. Do a guide on reviewing an SFM (KR)
5. Work with RCRIM (JK lead – all co-chairs)
HITSP – (Alean) White paper for IHE for public health domain and new profiles. KR stated that an IOM report is being worked on on HITSP. Wait until report comes out and then discuss on a call.
IHE – Bill Klaver (Initiate) stated “we need to get relationship with IHE resolved”. Both from public presence and working relationship. KR is going to connect with Charles Parisot to discuss relationship. Aim to produce a context diagram to show positions of HL7, IHE, HSSP, OMG etc. Charles agreed in principle to work with Ken. Initial draft will be posted. Possibly involve IHE in conference event planning.
Closing remarks: AW – Don’t forget Information viewpoint and DSS. GM – hopes to become more involved. KR – good week, AK – enjoying it. Suggests more outreach from those in the know, ESP TO – PHER, CDS