Concrete Team Notes from 5-6 f2f Meeting

From Direct Project
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The “Minimum Threshold” definition is not crisp enough to help people understand what they need to produce. We proposed to re-create this as a list of “capabilities” that must be demonstrated. Some will directly reference other workgroup artifacts like user stories, but not all may be so direct (e.g., “What is the story for integration with NHIN Connect?”). This will result in something that looks a little more like a response to an RFP, but that does not mean we are moving away from working code --- answers that shows an implementation of a capability will carry more weight than those that show a path. We expect that all groups will have some combination of code and mocks/descriptions. ACTION: On the WG call tomorrow morning I will ask for volunteers to build this list of capabilities.

There was broad concern that “one implementation,” while appropriate for the backbone, may be overly-restrictive from an edge perspective. This was not controversial, mostly the discussion seemed to be a clarification of somewhat vague terminology and intent. ACTION: We will require at least one edge implementation from a concrete group, and include in the capabilities list a question about how multiple types of edge systems can connect.

There was major concern about the short timeline we were working against. This was particularly severe for the IHE group that had competing obligations over the last couple of weeks. ACTION: we agreed to extend this process by one month --- meaning that we will make a final recommendation the week of June 6, in teleconference and at our next face-to-face meeting. I will suggest at WG call tomorrow that we force a “demo day” during the call on the 25th (turn it into a Live Meeting) as an interim milestone.

Honora’s full notes for the day are here: http://nhindirect.org/Implementation+Group+Meeting+05062010