*
*The NCI's take, from this document
<https://wiki.nci.nih.gov/download/attachments/18941682/Policy_Guidelines_ISO_21090_Final+%28Approved%29.doc?version=1&modificationDate=1247258606000>
available here
<https://wiki.nci.nih.gov/display/ISO21090/CBIIT+Guidelines+for+Using+the+ISO+21090+Standard>
on the NCI wiki (blue emphasis mine):
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ from NCI CBIIT Guidelines for Using the ISO
21090 Standard ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Guidelines
* The use of ISO 21090 data types is encouraged for CBIIT funded
projects.However, given that there are no standard open source
implementations that are available to the project teams, at the
time of developing the guidelines, *CBIIT (via ECAT) has
determined to validate the standards by supporting pilot projects*.
* ISO 21090 data types are required to be considered for analytical
services only and not for data services Please refer to caBIG?
compatibility Guidelines for definition of analytical and data
service.
* Use of ISO 21090 data types are required only at the "public
interfaces" of the analytical services (public Application
Programming Interfaces (APIs)) and *not for any internal data
structures or persistence tiers*.
* ...
Steps for Implementing the Guidelines
The guidelines *could potentially be disruptive to many projects that
are underway*, either due to contractual requirements or expectations
made to the key stakeholders.
Additionally, there is a need to develop appropriate information
mechanism (e.g. GForge site) to facilitate the integration of the ISO
21090 data types in a way that does not add any risk to the project and
also does not compromise project's business needs.
[... more]
Risks on Using the Standard
* *Unproven Standard*:The ISO 21090 data type standards have not
been implemented till date in large scale enterprise systems.
Hence, it is important to review progress of the pilot efforts
within CBIIT and outside organizations (E.g. Canada Health
Infoway, NEHTA, etc) at frequent intervals by ECAT to ensure that
the standards are implementable and do not cause unacceptable loss
in performance, scale, interoperability and service use.
* *Heavyweight*: *The ISO 21090 data types are complex information
models. It is possible that this might make it difficult or even
impossible to use as-is*. At the same time, if implementation
specific changes are made to the ISO 21090 data types, then there
is a risk that it might jeopardize interoperability outside CBIIT.
The ISO Project Manager will be required to bring such situations
to ECAT in a timely manner for appropriate guidance.
* *Lack of Tool Support*: Integrating the ISO data types in projects
may be too time consuming and require additional tools to be
created for ease of use. The tools could help in integrating the
data types into project (via SDK, caAdapter and caGrid) and also
in the semantic infrastructure for metadata registration.
* *Cost*: The use of ISO 21090 data types will most likely increase
development costs for projects, including creating tool support,
maintaining ISO 21090 data types as separate projects and project
coordination activity (via ISO Project Manager). It is important
for CBIIT to review the potential benefits of the effort with the
resources expended, to ensure that that appropriate return on
investment (ROI) is met. This review will be part of the overall
review of the use of ISO 21090 data types that will be conducted
approximately 12 months after the guidelines are put in practice.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What I take from this document:
* ISO 21090 is seen as complex, unvalidated, and risky
* a lot of work and activity - i.e. expense - is predicted within
NCI to cope with it (see the full version of the 'Steps for
Implementing the Guidelines' section)
I would be interested in hearing of other experiences.
- thomas beale
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20101106/e650aa4f/attachment.html>
