cto report -- tooling hl7 board meeting

© 2002-2010 Health Level Seven ®, Inc. All Rights Reserved. HL7 and Health Level Seven are registered trademarks of Health Level Seven, Inc. Reg. U.S. Pat & TM Off

CTO Report -- Tooling HL7 Board Meeting

John QuinnCambridge, MassOctober 5, 2010

October 5, 2010

© 2002-2010 Health Level Seven ®, Inc. All Rights Reserved. HL7 and Health Level Seven are registered trademarks of Health Level Seven International Reg. U.S. Pat & TM Off

Tooling Report

• Evolution of Tooling Processes• State of Current Tooling Projects• Opportunities for Collaboration• Implications for ongoing support

2

October 5, 2010


Process Before Tooling

3

October 5, 2010


Current Tooling Process

4

October 5, 2010


Future Tooling Process

5

October 5, 2010


Interdependence Between Methodology and Tooling

• Methodology and Reference Specifications are interdependent

• Methodology and HL7 Meta-Model are interdependent

• Tooling is dependent on Meta-Model• Feedback from implementers suggest changes to:

– Core Artifacts – RIM, Datatypes, Vocabulary– Methodology– Alignment with other SDOs

• All impact tooling

6

October 5, 2010


Interdependencies

7

October 5, 2010


Implications for Tooling Processes

• Increased formality for change control of all interdependencies

• Recognition that updates may be needed to previously balloted content to remain current

• Synchronization of changes need to be formalized into releases – both developmental and production

• Increased coordination and communication

8

October 5, 2010


HL7 Tooling Solution Vision

October 5, 2010


2010 Tooling Projects• 2009 Projects focused on improved stability and quality

measures of current tools and core reference artifacts.• 2010 Projects include:• V3 Publishing update to enable MIF 2.0 and streamline

implementation• Updates to the Static Model Designer initially developed by

the NHS as an Open Health Tools Project to incorporate changes needed to support full development cycle of Universal level artifacts as well as realm specific artifacts

• 2011 will be impacted by balloting of methodology and Model Interchange Format (MIF) as current static model version is 2.1.6 and reconciliation changes are targeted to MIF 2.0

10

October 5, 2010


Opportunities to Collaborate

• Current project to implement the NHSW Static Model Designer has completed the first increment for testing with HL7 Tooling and V3 Publishing WGs

• Canada Health Infoway is sponsoring a project to update and stabilize the V3 generator, incorporate Canadian enhancements and license as EPL

• A new project to develop requirements for the Shared Artifact Repository was proposed at the October 1, 2010 OHT Board Meeting – co-sponsored by IHTSDO and OMG

• Successful Pilot of another OHT Project – Model Driven Health Tools, sponsored by IBM & the VA designing CDA Templates and generating Implementation Guides but will need HL7 support to become an HL7 tool

• Other projects supporting vocabulary management, conformance testing, example message generation, semantic mapping, code generation and others that support implementation are underway at OHT

11

October 5, 2010


Shared Artifact Repository

• Proposal to create a charter project to:– Assemble requirements from OHT members– Identify existing technology capabilities to

support requirements– Preferably based on extensible open source

architecture with significant community to continue to evolve

– Co-sponsored by HL7, OMG and IHTSDO

October 5, 2010


Value Proposition

• Many OHT members require ability to register existence of and relationships among controlled artifacts

• Artifacts are controlled components of interdependent technical environments and include (but are not limited to)– Models– Specification components– Vocabulary codes systems, concept domains and value sets– Source code– Software documentation components

October 5, 2010


Value Proposition

• HL7 alone has at least 8 types of artifacts that are managed through separate review processes, many with significant interdependencies

• Various members can produce implementation and conformance specifications based on HL7 specifications and other specifications including from IHTSDO, W3C and OMG - including machine readable artifacts

• Multiple types of artifacts required distinct registration support and may require different user authentication roles and processes

• Pooling requirements and acquiring or developing robust registration and artifact management capabilities are needed to support collaborative ecosystem and demonstrate necessary component accountability

• Design for change – manage for change; collectively

October 5, 2010


Shared Artifact Repository

Core

Extras

October 5, 2010


V3 Normative Specifications

16

2005 2006 2008 2010

Content Domains 7 10 14 20

Infrastructure Domains 6 6 6 6

CMETS 90 100 135 180

Payload Message Types 148 176 225 247

Interactions 418 451 564 628

Trigger Events 131 162 268 324

Application Roles 281 295 347 394

Story Boards 90 109 175 218

Every year there are more interdependent artifacts to manage

October 5, 2010


Budget Implications for Tooling

• Maintaining and Enhancing HL7 Tooling requires– Help desk support for technical support for installation and

configuration and user support for appropriate use– Both commercially acquired tools and developed tools require

ongoing maintenance support– Formal change management with release schedules and integration

testing to ensure tools work together– Development of new tools requires collaboration with both other

SDOs and potential tool users to align methodologies and increase interoperability

– Coordination with other HL7 WGs to align methodology and tools, train and support users and support conversion of existing artifacts

• Benefits of increased tooling can not be realized with proposed 2011 budget and we will enter a period of “maintenance” at best.

17

cto report -- tooling hl7 board meeting

Documents