Difference between revisions of "ConCall-20070124"
WoodyBeeler (talk | contribs) |
|||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
'''Online Meeting''' service - GoToMeeting | '''Online Meeting''' service - GoToMeeting | ||
| − | :https://www.gotomeeting.com/join/873285595 | + | : for this meeting only : https://www.gotomeeting.com/join/949147364 |
| + | :not https://www.gotomeeting.com/join/873285595 | ||
:GoToMeeting ID: 873-285-595 | :GoToMeeting ID: 873-285-595 | ||
| − | = | + | =Present= |
| − | Beeler, Blobel, Buitendijk, Case, Lorenzi, McCay, Parker | + | Beeler, Blobel, Buitendijk, Case, Hammond, Lorenzi, McCaslin, McCay, Parker, Walker |
| − | =Homework= | + | =Prior Homework= |
Review/update working items as: | Review/update working items as: | ||
*[[Core Challenges For T3F]] | *[[Core Challenges For T3F]] | ||
*[[Six Core Architecture Features]] | *[[Six Core Architecture Features]] | ||
| − | = | + | =Accepted Agenda= |
| − | #''(05 min)'' Roll Call & | + | #''(05 min)'' Roll Call & Accepted agenda |
#''(20 min)'' Refine [[Core Challenges For T3F]] | #''(20 min)'' Refine [[Core Challenges For T3F]] | ||
#:Need Success Criteria | #:Need Success Criteria | ||
| Line 27: | Line 28: | ||
#''(10 min)'' Review, update [[T3F Action item list]] | #''(10 min)'' Review, update [[T3F Action item list]] | ||
## Review list of documents (McCay) | ## Review list of documents (McCay) | ||
| + | =Architecture= | ||
| + | We moved architecture discussion to the beginning to accomodate Bert's time. He had concerns that the architure features and basic principles needed work and pointed everyone to the papers he has posted on this subject. He noted that quality, usability, scalability, and portability should be included. It was agreed that readability could be removed. He might draft suggestions on how to improve. Others on the call expressed an interest that we focus more time in the immediate future on operational and organizational aspects of T3F rather than architecture, that is, defining how the T3F will effectively ensure compliance with a technical architecture. | ||
| + | =Core Challenges= | ||
| + | We discussed the role of "arb" during the transition. It was recommended that arb continue to do what it does today but should report to the T3F. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Charlie edited the Core Challenges section on the wiki based on refinement discussions. | ||
| + | |||
| + | We discussion TD organization and the organizational charts presented. Ed suggested we take over the top boc of TD and evolve everything under it. Ed will try to find the original author of the Strategic Initiatives Org Chart diagram. It was noted that the charts we've stored on the wiki are both somewhat misleading. The one from ORC looks "messy" but really represents the full picture of the three areas - Foundations&Technology, Structure&Semantics, and Domain Expertise where most volunteer work will occur. The one from the Strategic Task Force report looks much cleaner but hides the details on these three areas. It also shows paid positions in more detail than volunteer positions which may be misleading. The difference between Product and Project Managers was not clear. Ed thinks we need a discussion on "What is the technical directorate?" Virginia agreed to try to do mock up diagram(s). We agreed that we should read the Strategic Task Force report section on the Technical Directorate and add discussion on it before next meeting. | ||
=[[T3F Agenda item list|Agenda item list (our sand box for future meetings)]]= | =[[T3F Agenda item list|Agenda item list (our sand box for future meetings)]]= | ||
| + | Next week - carry forward Documents discussion (did not have time this week). | ||
| + | We should time box architecture to 10 minutes and place at end of agenda. | ||
=[[T3F Action item list|Click for T3F Action Item List]]= | =[[T3F Action item list|Click for T3F Action Item List]]= | ||
Latest revision as of 06:37, 28 January 2007
T3F - Transitional Technical Task Force
Conference Call is scheduled for 1.0 hour
Wed Jan 24, 2007 12:00 PM (US Eastern Time, GMT -5)
Please consult http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock for your local times
Telephone conference Information - HL7 Conference Service
- Phone Number: 973-582-2813
- Participant Passcode: 124466
Online Meeting service - GoToMeeting
- for this meeting only : https://www.gotomeeting.com/join/949147364
- not https://www.gotomeeting.com/join/873285595
- GoToMeeting ID: 873-285-595
Contents
Present
Beeler, Blobel, Buitendijk, Case, Hammond, Lorenzi, McCaslin, McCay, Parker, Walker
Prior Homework
Review/update working items as:
Accepted Agenda
- (05 min) Roll Call & Accepted agenda
- (20 min) Refine Core Challenges For T3F
- Need Success Criteria
- (20 min) Complete top-level representation of Six Core Architecture Features
- (10 min) Review, update T3F Action item list
- Review list of documents (McCay)
Architecture
We moved architecture discussion to the beginning to accomodate Bert's time. He had concerns that the architure features and basic principles needed work and pointed everyone to the papers he has posted on this subject. He noted that quality, usability, scalability, and portability should be included. It was agreed that readability could be removed. He might draft suggestions on how to improve. Others on the call expressed an interest that we focus more time in the immediate future on operational and organizational aspects of T3F rather than architecture, that is, defining how the T3F will effectively ensure compliance with a technical architecture.
Core Challenges
We discussed the role of "arb" during the transition. It was recommended that arb continue to do what it does today but should report to the T3F.
Charlie edited the Core Challenges section on the wiki based on refinement discussions.
We discussion TD organization and the organizational charts presented. Ed suggested we take over the top boc of TD and evolve everything under it. Ed will try to find the original author of the Strategic Initiatives Org Chart diagram. It was noted that the charts we've stored on the wiki are both somewhat misleading. The one from ORC looks "messy" but really represents the full picture of the three areas - Foundations&Technology, Structure&Semantics, and Domain Expertise where most volunteer work will occur. The one from the Strategic Task Force report looks much cleaner but hides the details on these three areas. It also shows paid positions in more detail than volunteer positions which may be misleading. The difference between Product and Project Managers was not clear. Ed thinks we need a discussion on "What is the technical directorate?" Virginia agreed to try to do mock up diagram(s). We agreed that we should read the Strategic Task Force report section on the Technical Directorate and add discussion on it before next meeting.
Agenda item list (our sand box for future meetings)
Next week - carry forward Documents discussion (did not have time this week). We should time box architecture to 10 minutes and place at end of agenda.
