Note:  SOA has shifted to using the confluence-based Attendance tool.  Quarter-by-quarter attendance appears here.  All votes were conducted in compliance with DMP and with quorum.

Monday Q3 SOA General Introduction: 

Discussion of Workgroup priorities and intro to new members.

   Cursory Agenda Review

Monday Q4 SOA Reports

Order Service-

   Due to shifting priorities, no progress has been made on Order Service since last meeting.  Cognitive has been doing some internal reorganization.  Suggested that we revisit this in Montreal.


CDS -  Nobody present to conduct update

Marketplace Specification – Went out to ballot and reasonable number of comments received.  Generally well supported by ballot reviewers.  Reconciliation planned for this meeting.  Adjustments were
made to the SOA agenda to allow for more reconciliation time given the number of ballot responses. 

Service Reference Architecture - Alignment interest with HSPC continues.  HSPC had an architectural summit in December and had been discussing a Reference Architecture Model.  Several people involved in both SOA and that community expressed interest in alignment/convergence.  Worksession planned for Tuesday Q1 as an adjusted time to better accommodate interested parties

Cloud planning guide - Updated survey was conducted and closed in November/December, with results posted.  Need to incorporate content into document and publish.  Revised survey affirmed original results that most organizations undertaking cloud activities related to a modernization strategy and not exclusively a PAAS/IAAS play.  

New Service Candidates-  A number of potential new, detailed services were identified.  Capabilities around License Management, Context Management, Event Management, etc. were briefly discussed.  There is renewed interest in taking on context management.  Efforts within FHIRcast appear to align with the Context Management Service work that had been done.  Preston will outreach to Richard Esmond, whom is active in FHIRcast, to determine potential for alignment.  Expectation is that a PSS related to this would be developed during the week and be proffered by week-end.

Tuesday Q1:  Reference Architecture

Expressed interest in convergence of activities across multiple SDOs and consortia:  HSPC's Platform Architecture Specification, Open Group, OMG, etc. 

Much of the conversation centered around the HSPC Workshop and how to converge that work with SOA/HSSP.   Two complementary but distinct architectural models were presented.  The SOA Reference Architecture Concept diagram and the Perspecta's Health Concourse Architectural Model (Health Concourse - standard deck 201810.pptx) in particular.  Key Takeaways resulted in the following action-steps:

>  There was a need to base work on a shared industry EA framework, with representations in multiple views to address separation on concerns (Info View vs. Computational/Technical View vs. Deployment View)

>  Need to determine the role of the Canonical (Information) Model in the framework.  Recognized need to have it represented and indicate which services/capabilities need it and which don't.  

>  Include designators in the architectural diagram as to which capabilities are "core", which are not-core but extend the core, and what is outside the scope of the architecture proper (e.g., applications)

>  Detailed discussion about what is "black box" (e.g., embedded behind an API) vs. what is "white box" (e.g., orchestration between capabilities, in front of the APIs)

>  Make a determination about where to reflect API-oriented capabilities and services in terms of layering on the diagram (e.g., is it a "top" or "bottom" layer, and where specifically on the stack)

>  Establish a point-of-view for how localization would be applied to the reference architecture (how does an institution adopt this?)

>  Determine an approach and define the extent to which vertical grouping of capabilities will be depicted (e.g., Patient-oriented, institutional-oriented, etc.; or not)

>  Define and depict cross-cutting capabilities (vertically?  Orthogonal slices?  Other?)

>  Reflection of separation of concerns, identifying which and how many depictions will be created (e.g., RM-ODP or others)

>  General approach of starting with the HSSP Reference Architecture (SOA Model), which is simpler, and extending it to address identified needs and gaps as a solution strategy.  This was determined instead of starting with a more complex depiction and then removing detail.

Tuesday Q2:  Marketplace Ballot Reconciliation

(Note that reconciliation spreadsheets are posted in the San Antonio Agenda page.  The posted instances reflect the result of the quarter reflected).

Ballot reconciliation for all non-in-person ballot comments was conducted with individual items dispositioned.  Details of those votes are available in the reconciliation spreadsheet.  In addition to the reconciliation, we had the following motion:

"Motion to address any typographical and editorial concerns".  Motion Lorraine Constable, Second Preston Lee; Passed unanimously with quorum.

Tuesday Q3:  Marketplace Ballot Reconciliation (Continued)

(Note that reconciliation spreadsheets are posted in the San Antonio Agenda page.  The posted instances reflect the result of the quarter reflected).

Focus on in-person ballot comments (all in-person requests were from Keith Boone).  See reconciliation sheet for details.  

Result from the Quarter was that all items were successfully reconciled. 

Tuesday Q4:  Given small attendance and lack of substantive update on Order Service, group joined CDS.  See the minutes from their workgroup for details. 

Wednesday Q1:  Joint session with EHR (and others), EHR Hosting. 

Wednesday Q2:

Wednesday Q3:

Wednesday Q4:  Cancelled.



  • No labels