Documentation and Testing Meeting 2010-07-21
Date: July 21, 2010
Attendees: Didi Davis, Tom Silvious, Janet Campbell, Tony Calice, Nageshwara Bashyam, Pat pyette, Parag More, Uvinie Hettiaratchy, Dan Kazzaz, David Tao, Amram Ewoo, Keith Boone, Will Ross
Actions for this Week
|| Update wiki with contact information and progress section for each of the documents
||Review NHIN Direct Overview Document
Actions from last Week
|| Work on preliminary prioritization on artifact list
||Work on initial abstracts of documents
· Main thing I’d like to do is check in on all the projects we’re doing.
· Also we have a week to try documenting.
· Any lessons learned if process would be easier.
· After this meeting, I’d like to put together some structure to documentation itself.
Round the Room for anybody who has volunteered, where you are at, and any questions that have come up. Any suggestions for process.
||· Started drafting. Better update next call. |
||· FEI does not have any document signed but would like to participate in peer review or taking one on. Would like to assist. |
||· Signed up for the initial overview for NHIN Direct. David Tao, Will Ross, and Rich Elmore have been helping. Creating initial version of that document under NHIN Direct Overview. I won’t be able to complete all sections, so would like to identify sections for review and let the team actually review the document and give me feedback. Feedback by end of this week and complete sections by next week. August 17th goal is to have a preliminary complete version. |
||· I think Dragon is doing lion’s share and we’ll contribute to feedback. |
||· We actually had a meeting this week. We worked through what we started and talked about second level revision. |
||· First documentation meeting. I would certainly be willing to contribute to Agent document and any of the Security and Privacy documents. |
||· First session and have no update.|
||· This is the first meeting I’ve been able to get on the call. Getting caught up on previous meetings.|
||· Will provide guidance on how the group will generate IEPD to exchange health care information. It’ll have standards and processes in progress used by NIEM – National Information Exchange Model. Contribute to main IEPD and initially my role would be to provide guidance on how we can create a spec document that will be conformant with NIEM and IEPD. Will put together something and send to group.|
||· I have another document and have volunteered for XDD specification which is the slim down XDR. I created a wiki page link. Would certainly welcome feedback to that abstract. In response to what would help, it would help for each wiki page who the primary contact on that document. List of people who are committed to review. |
||· Took stab at conformance guide. Did the abstract. Last time when the assignments were done, are we taking up whole ownership of the document? Input and second review would help. |
· Keith Boone – Happy to help with development of conformance guide.
||· Would like to help out. Either writing or reviewing. |
· I had policy questions so I put together an abstract for that. I think the major thing I heard was David’s suggestion to add primary owners to wiki page, which documents don’t yet have owners and which documents people have committed to reviewing. I will add a slot on wiki so that people know what’s going on.
· I heard that the NHIN Direct document is the major document. Dragon had questions on right content and other areas. As follow up for next meeting, we can focus on that document and the sections that are in it right now. If you have questions as drafting, we can pose those questions to group. Also generally review and give feedback.
· Any comments or concerns with that idea?
· Sounds like a good idea.
· Let’s plan for that for next meeting then. Other follow ups, I’ll note whose doing what and track status.
· Any other topics?
· Last time we spoke about classifying documents based on technical vs. non-technical. Are we going to do that?
· I think Arien talked about using the audience to drive that. Is that in terms of guiding expectations?
· Yes, that’s fine. Any particular sections or format that we should stick to? Or follow whatever format suits each document?
· I think we should just be organic about it. As we review other people’s documents, we’ll see things that pop out as useful.