Re: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re: [Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye Mumps
I would like to extend Chris' comments to note that the RFC is an excellent mechanism for carrying out a strategy but giving MUMPS the strength it needs will result when we have a Strategic Plan for the MDC activiites. Then the RFCs can tactically breakout the ideinfied and prioritized tasks need to evolve a comprehensive data maangement evironment that utilizes the capabilities already available in othe rtechnologies in ways that enhances the strong points of the direct M environment. Terry's Object Orientation is one capabiliity building on inherent M capability. The MWAPI standards dealt with giving functionality for GUI presentation at an early stage but other variants of these ideas may be described in an integrated fashion that will be useful for desgners of Enterprise Architectures. These strategic priorities will hav e a different profile for the M environment than they will for those focusing on Oracle for example. Msters have to show that they are smarter than the competition by using M strong points in an effective Life Cycle way that may be different from how other technologies may have to approach it. The MUMPs is dead are brain dead but their inability to think should not slow down those in the MUMPS community; nevertheless, it will mean doing things differently than was done from 1973-1999. So how are we going to assemble a Strategy Group for the new MDC? On Thu, 25 Nov 2004, Chris Richardson wrote: Wolfgang; I couldn't agree with you more. We need to take a slightly different tactic in starting/reviving the MDC. Let us first take a look at why it faltered so that we understand the pitfalls we must overcome; 1) Deliberation was exhaustively slow in that many of us were working on this effort only sporadically. Many issues got forgotten and had to be recovered. We started to do better in the last couple of years, but more streamlined efforts need to be investigated 2) Loss of funding/support by MUG contributors and member organizations 3) The MDC was looked on as an Ivory Tower. We need to have more eyes on the problems and suggestions added to make the solutions smoother. To these issues, I personally would prefer that we investigate the use of something like the IEEE RFC (Request For Comment) as a model for airing the proposals. This allows lots of eyes to examine the issue and a lot of folks thinking about solutions. Each RFC has a champion or a group of champions who are identified as the focus point for considering the solutions and re-issuing the RFC. Each RFC has a period of review by the public which is finite. This gives a bit more timely resolution to the problems and keeps a history of the discoveries and ideas. This approach can be extended to web structure so that all have access to the ideas and progress of these ideas. Progress will be made as individuals get involved and make comment. We need to be inclusive and self-enrolling by participation. The champions make report to the subcommittees of the MDC. The RFC has the deliberation already documented and a specification has been presented, and a sample implementation has been modeled. All issues should have resolved by the time the RFC gets to the Subcommittee and the job of the Subcommittee is to integrate the RFC into the published standard. It will be those changes to the standard which are finally passed to the full MDC to authorize and then release. Much of this work can happen from the web and email without much face to face effort. As such, much of the deliberation has a paper trail and history. The possibilities are numerous and exciting. Best wishes; Chris Richardson - Original Message - From: Prof. em. Dr. med. Wolfgang Giere [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 8:28 AM Subject: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re: [Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye Mumps This is wonderful. But I would suggest not to raise publicity before it isn't clear that there will be people and support for a new MDC and which route to take. Better be coutious now than frustrated later! I have been member of the MDC and head of the German ISO delegation for years and could afford it thanks to my institute, the center of medical informatics of the university in Frankfurt. I am retired now, my deputy chairman, Wolfgang Kirsten is ill, not available for quite a while and I am afraid, many of other old hands are no more available. .Who would volunteer do it? In my opinion there would be three major activity blocks needed (provided we agree upon the need!) : - one development of the standard itself: Tough and tedious work requiring specialists. - one coaching the new standard within the international bodies: Requires contacts, convincing personalities, comittee meetings, much support, time, and effort - one development of the case (probably VistA) in the minds of people, societies, govenment
Re: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re:[Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye Mumps
The IETF requires something like this. Actually, there is no requirement that multiple implementations be provided by different vendors, but for an RFC to reach the status of standard, there must be multiple interoperable implementations from different code bases. Tying the procdess to commerical vendors would be antithetical to the spirit and intent of the IETF process. --- K.S. Bhaskar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: While I like the idea of standards, and have been involved in standards activities in other places and times (although not personally in the MDC, I did pay for representation from GT.M), it would seem to me that useful standards require multiple implementations from competing vendors. For vendors to implement systems that are compliant with standards, there must be some financial incentive for them to do so, such as customers requiring standards compliance for the products they select. Otherwise, vendors that invest in making their products standards compliant are only shooting themselves in the foot, because competitors that don't invest in standards compliance will laugh all the way to the bank. In the area of desktop operating systems, for example, there are no standards because customers have not provided an incentive for the industry leader to implement any standard except its own proprietary standard. M may not be in that different a state. If we are going to revive standards efforts, let's make sure we have a plan for the effort to take us somewhere. -- Bhaskar = A practical man is a man who practices the errors of his forefathers. --Benjamin Disraeli Greg Woodhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ ___ Hardhats-members mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
Re: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re: [Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye Mumps
It may also be useful to look at how the Python and Perl communities are approaching language change. But, in any event, standardization of a language that has evolved through an open source process (if that's what MUMPS becomes) could be a bit of a thorny problem. There are open source compilers for ANSI C, but C certainly did not become an ANSI standard because of them. --- Terry Wiechmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree, the Open Source model is an excellent model to start with. As all things do, it will evolve with experience. Terry L. Wiechmann www.esitechnology.com 978-779-0257 Skype: twiechmann = A practical man is a man who practices the errors of his forefathers. --Benjamin Disraeli Greg Woodhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ ___ Hardhats-members mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
[Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re: [Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye Mumps
This is wonderful. But I would suggest not to raise publicity before it isn't clear that there will be people and support for a new MDC and which route to take. Better be coutious now than frustrated later! I have been member of the MDC and head of the German ISO delegation for years and could afford it thanks to my institute, the center of medical informatics of the university in Frankfurt. I am retired now, my deputy chairman, Wolfgang Kirsten is ill, not available for quite a while and I am afraid, many of other old hands are no more available. .Who would volunteer do it? In my opinion there would be three major activity blocks needed (provided we agree upon the need!) : - one development of the standard itself: Tough and tedious work requiring specialists. - one coaching the new standard within the international bodies: Requires contacts, convincing personalities, comittee meetings, much support, time, and effort - one development of the case (probably VistA) in the minds of people, societies, govenment agencies, ... This needs PR at it's best. Probably there should be some few activists coordination the efforts, structuring the cooperation etc. Wolfgang Giere Wolfgang Giere Joseph Dal Molin wrote: I have just returned from Brasil where I gave a worskshop on open source in health informatics. I was invited by the Brasilian Health Informatics Society and as a result have made some good friends and excellent contacts. I will contact both the current and past president of the Society as well as colleagues in Sao Paolo to inform them of this discussion. What this will need is a small team of midwives and lots of publicity and support. With a team in place I will table a motion at our next WorldVistA board meeting to support to this effort. I should think that the VSA would want to do the same as well as the Pacific Telehealth Hui. We can then use press releases etc. to get the word out we have good access to reporters several trade journals etc. We can also use other medical informatics forums such as the openhealth listand submit to Slashdot. Also all the medical informatics schools should also be contacted. Unfortunately all I can offer is to help launch this group, I have no expertise in M at allbut I do have a great deal of experience building communities of this kind in health informatics. Cheers, Joseph Prof. em. Dr. med. Wolfgang Giere wrote: I fully agree with Arden Forrey's remarks. It was a shame that the Millenium Standard did not happen. It took us a long march through the institutions to make Mumps an ISO-Standard. To revive MDC as official body can be done either using the old ANSI-affiliation or through a ISO WG (that would be the normal way). Both ways reuire international participation. I suppose, MUG Germany would be willing to participate (I cannot ask my successor Wolfgang Kirsten, he is hospitalized right now). Also I guess, Frans Witte (Netherlands) could be reactivated. Ion Diamond in GB? I do not know whether he is still active in the field. But there is a new commercial Mumps available in GB. Finland? I do not know the actual state of M-use there. What about South America? Could George Timson trigger participation? I once visited M-using hospitals in Sao Paulo and might be able to find out. We should get NEW people. I did not follow the ISO-story. Is the standard sustained? I have been asked in Germany and suggested to vote yes, but I did never ask for the results. Does anybody know? Wolfgang Giere A. Forrey wrote: I definitely support Joseph's statement, as Rick and other hard hats already know. I felt dissolution of both the MTA and the MDC were wrong following the 1999 meeting and the fact that the Millenium Standard was ready for ballot at that last meeting but never happened was a setback. It can be reversed. A host organization for the MDC and an organizational framework for an ANSI-accredited SDO must be written. The NE MUG remains a viable organization and encompass all the market, not just healthcare or VistA and this will be important. WV must actively promote getting this done. Bashkar can offer inputs regarding other market segments and an initial listing of Suppliers of of M-based products and services must be compiled quickly to aid in this effort. The HH website can be a mechanmism of dissemination. Another question of great importance has to do with building the education infrastructure to which Dick Walters insights will be important. We must stimulate the creation of programs which feature M and how it is integrated into the Life Cycle Principles for system design and implementation as well as how to utilize its unique features to advantage. This subject was pushed at the Sept 1998 MDC meeting in Seattle but had not taken off by the 1999 San Diego meeting; the resurrecred MDC must be structured to address
Re: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re: [Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye Mumps
Yes completely agree regarding publicity etc.what I had in mind was connecting the community nerve ending back together firstpublicity must wait for the foundation to be in place. Joseph Prof. em. Dr. med. Wolfgang Giere wrote: This is wonderful. But I would suggest not to raise publicity before it isn't clear that there will be people and support for a new MDC and which route to take. Better be coutious now than frustrated later! I have been member of the MDC and head of the German ISO delegation for years and could afford it thanks to my institute, the center of medical informatics of the university in Frankfurt. I am retired now, my deputy chairman, Wolfgang Kirsten is ill, not available for quite a while and I am afraid, many of other old hands are no more available. .Who would volunteer do it? In my opinion there would be three major activity blocks needed (provided we agree upon the need!) : - one development of the standard itself: Tough and tedious work requiring specialists. - one coaching the new standard within the international bodies: Requires contacts, convincing personalities, comittee meetings, much support, time, and effort - one development of the case (probably VistA) in the minds of people, societies, govenment agencies, ... This needs PR at it's best. Probably there should be some few activists coordination the efforts, structuring the cooperation etc. Wolfgang Giere Wolfgang Giere Joseph Dal Molin wrote: I have just returned from Brasil where I gave a worskshop on open source in health informatics. I was invited by the Brasilian Health Informatics Society and as a result have made some good friends and excellent contacts. I will contact both the current and past president of the Society as well as colleagues in Sao Paolo to inform them of this discussion. What this will need is a small team of midwives and lots of publicity and support. With a team in place I will table a motion at our next WorldVistA board meeting to support to this effort. I should think that the VSA would want to do the same as well as the Pacific Telehealth Hui. We can then use press releases etc. to get the word out we have good access to reporters several trade journals etc. We can also use other medical informatics forums such as the openhealth listand submit to Slashdot. Also all the medical informatics schools should also be contacted. Unfortunately all I can offer is to help launch this group, I have no expertise in M at allbut I do have a great deal of experience building communities of this kind in health informatics. Cheers, Joseph Prof. em. Dr. med. Wolfgang Giere wrote: I fully agree with Arden Forrey's remarks. It was a shame that the Millenium Standard did not happen. It took us a long march through the institutions to make Mumps an ISO-Standard. To revive MDC as official body can be done either using the old ANSI-affiliation or through a ISO WG (that would be the normal way). Both ways reuire international participation. I suppose, MUG Germany would be willing to participate (I cannot ask my successor Wolfgang Kirsten, he is hospitalized right now). Also I guess, Frans Witte (Netherlands) could be reactivated. Ion Diamond in GB? I do not know whether he is still active in the field. But there is a new commercial Mumps available in GB. Finland? I do not know the actual state of M-use there. What about South America? Could George Timson trigger participation? I once visited M-using hospitals in Sao Paulo and might be able to find out. We should get NEW people. I did not follow the ISO-story. Is the standard sustained? I have been asked in Germany and suggested to vote yes, but I did never ask for the results. Does anybody know? Wolfgang Giere A. Forrey wrote: I definitely support Joseph's statement, as Rick and other hard hats already know. I felt dissolution of both the MTA and the MDC were wrong following the 1999 meeting and the fact that the Millenium Standard was ready for ballot at that last meeting but never happened was a setback. It can be reversed. A host organization for the MDC and an organizational framework for an ANSI-accredited SDO must be written. The NE MUG remains a viable organization and encompass all the market, not just healthcare or VistA and this will be important. WV must actively promote getting this done. Bashkar can offer inputs regarding other market segments and an initial listing of Suppliers of of M-based products and services must be compiled quickly to aid in this effort. The HH website can be a mechanmism of dissemination. Another question of great importance has to do with building the education infrastructure to which Dick Walters insights will be important. We must stimulate the creation of programs which feature M and how it is integrated into the Life Cycle Principles for system design and implementation as well as how to utilize its unique features to advantage. This subject was pushed at the Sept 1998 MDC meeting
Re: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re: [Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye Mumps
I know nothing of the processes etc. of the MDC... but it sounds like some of the tenents of open source might be helpfuleg. release early release often, break things down into doable chunks etc. Perhaps there is an opportunity to adopt some of these methods. J. Chris Richardson wrote: Wolfgang; I couldn't agree with you more. We need to take a slightly different tactic in starting/reviving the MDC. Let us first take a look at why it faltered so that we understand the pitfalls we must overcome; 1) Deliberation was exhaustively slow in that many of us were working on this effort only sporadically. Many issues got forgotten and had to be recovered. We started to do better in the last couple of years, but more streamlined efforts need to be investigated 2) Loss of funding/support by MUG contributors and member organizations 3) The MDC was looked on as an Ivory Tower. We need to have more eyes on the problems and suggestions added to make the solutions smoother. To these issues, I personally would prefer that we investigate the use of something like the IEEE RFC (Request For Comment) as a model for airing the proposals. This allows lots of eyes to examine the issue and a lot of folks thinking about solutions. Each RFC has a champion or a group of champions who are identified as the focus point for considering the solutions and re-issuing the RFC. Each RFC has a period of review by the public which is finite. This gives a bit more timely resolution to the problems and keeps a history of the discoveries and ideas. This approach can be extended to web structure so that all have access to the ideas and progress of these ideas. Progress will be made as individuals get involved and make comment. We need to be inclusive and self-enrolling by participation. The champions make report to the subcommittees of the MDC. The RFC has the deliberation already documented and a specification has been presented, and a sample implementation has been modeled. All issues should have resolved by the time the RFC gets to the Subcommittee and the job of the Subcommittee is to integrate the RFC into the published standard. It will be those changes to the standard which are finally passed to the full MDC to authorize and then release. Much of this work can happen from the web and email without much face to face effort. As such, much of the deliberation has a paper trail and history. The possibilities are numerous and exciting. Best wishes; Chris Richardson - Original Message - From: Prof. em. Dr. med. Wolfgang Giere [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 8:28 AM Subject: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re: [Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye Mumps This is wonderful. But I would suggest not to raise publicity before it isn't clear that there will be people and support for a new MDC and which route to take. Better be coutious now than frustrated later! I have been member of the MDC and head of the German ISO delegation for years and could afford it thanks to my institute, the center of medical informatics of the university in Frankfurt. I am retired now, my deputy chairman, Wolfgang Kirsten is ill, not available for quite a while and I am afraid, many of other old hands are no more available. .Who would volunteer do it? In my opinion there would be three major activity blocks needed (provided we agree upon the need!) : - one development of the standard itself: Tough and tedious work requiring specialists. - one coaching the new standard within the international bodies: Requires contacts, convincing personalities, comittee meetings, much support, time, and effort - one development of the case (probably VistA) in the minds of people, societies, govenment agencies, ... This needs PR at it's best. Probably there should be some few activists coordination the efforts, structuring the cooperation etc. Wolfgang Giere Wolfgang Giere Joseph Dal Molin wrote: I have just returned from Brasil where I gave a worskshop on open source in health informatics. I was invited by the Brasilian Health Informatics Society and as a result have made some good friends and excellent contacts. I will contact both the current and past president of the Society as well as colleagues in Sao Paolo to inform them of this discussion. What this will need is a small team of midwives and lots of publicity and support. With a team in place I will table a motion at our next WorldVistA board meeting to support to this effort. I should think that the VSA would want to do the same as well as the Pacific Telehealth Hui. We can then use press releases etc. to get the word out we have good access to reporters several trade journals etc. We can also use other medical informatics forums such as the openhealth listand submit to Slashdot. Also all the medical informatics schools should also be contacted. Unfortunately all I
Re: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re: [Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye Mumps
To add to the recent posts Also some very simple things need to be done, such as: building capacity for support and development... training, education etc. capacity need to be ramped up to meet demand and at the same time create demand. I am very concerned that the demand that is being stimulated for VistA, VistAOffice etc. and current deployments will lead to great missed expectations without adequate resources to meet both the quantity and skills necessary. This is a far greater threat to VistA's continued success and evolution than any technology architecture issues. So along with the important issues of M's evolution there needs to be a capacity building effort for support and development resources in parallel to the software engineering efforts. Joseph Terry Wiechmann wrote: I agree, the Open Source model is an excellent model to start with. As all things do, it will evolve with experience. Terry L. Wiechmann www.esitechnology.com 978-779-0257 Skype: twiechmann - Original Message - From: Joseph Dal Molin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 3:57 PM Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re: [Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye Mumps I know nothing of the processes etc. of the MDC... but it sounds like some of the tenents of open source might be helpfuleg. release early release often, break things down into doable chunks etc. Perhaps there is an opportunity to adopt some of these methods. J. Chris Richardson wrote: Wolfgang; I couldn't agree with you more. We need to take a slightly different tactic in starting/reviving the MDC. Let us first take a look at why it faltered so that we understand the pitfalls we must overcome; 1) Deliberation was exhaustively slow in that many of us were working on this effort only sporadically. Many issues got forgotten and had to be recovered. We started to do better in the last couple of years, but more streamlined efforts need to be investigated 2) Loss of funding/support by MUG contributors and member organizations 3) The MDC was looked on as an Ivory Tower. We need to have more eyes on the problems and suggestions added to make the solutions smoother. To these issues, I personally would prefer that we investigate the use of something like the IEEE RFC (Request For Comment) as a model for airing the proposals. This allows lots of eyes to examine the issue and a lot of folks thinking about solutions. Each RFC has a champion or a group of champions who are identified as the focus point for considering the solutions and re-issuing the RFC. Each RFC has a period of review by the public which is finite. This gives a bit more timely resolution to the problems and keeps a history of the discoveries and ideas. This approach can be extended to web structure so that all have access to the ideas and progress of these ideas. Progress will be made as individuals get involved and make comment. We need to be inclusive and self-enrolling by participation. The champions make report to the subcommittees of the MDC. The RFC has the deliberation already documented and a specification has been presented, and a sample implementation has been modeled. All issues should have resolved by the time the RFC gets to the Subcommittee and the job of the Subcommittee is to integrate the RFC into the published standard. It will be those changes to the standard which are finally passed to the full MDC to authorize and then release. Much of this work can happen from the web and email without much face to face effort. As such, much of the deliberation has a paper trail and history. The possibilities are numerous and exciting. Best wishes; Chris Richardson - Original Message - From: Prof. em. Dr. med. Wolfgang Giere [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 8:28 AM Subject: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re: [Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye Mumps This is wonderful. But I would suggest not to raise publicity before it isn't clear that there will be people and support for a new MDC and which route to take. Better be coutious now than frustrated later! I have been member of the MDC and head of the German ISO delegation for years and could afford it thanks to my institute, the center of medical informatics of the university in Frankfurt. I am retired now, my deputy chairman, Wolfgang Kirsten is ill, not available for quite a while and I am afraid, many of other old hands are no more available. .Who would volunteer do it? In my opinion there would be three major activity blocks needed (provided we agree upon the need!) : - one development of the standard itself: Tough and tedious work requiring specialists. - one coaching the new standard within the international bodies: Requires contacts, convincing personalities, comittee meetings
Re: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re:[Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye Mumps
While I like the idea of standards, and have been involved in standards activities in other places and times (although not personally in the MDC, I did pay for representation from GT.M), it would seem to me that useful standards require multiple implementations from competing vendors. For vendors to implement systems that are compliant with standards, there must be some financial incentive for them to do so, such as customers requiring standards compliance for the products they select. Otherwise, vendors that invest in making their products standards compliant are only shooting themselves in the foot, because competitors that don't invest in standards compliance will laugh all the way to the bank. In the area of desktop operating systems, for example, there are no standards because customers have not provided an incentive for the industry leader to implement any standard except its own proprietary standard. M may not be in that different a state. If we are going to revive standards efforts, let's make sure we have a plan for the effort to take us somewhere. -- Bhaskar On Thu, 2004-11-25 at 12:57, Joseph Dal Molin wrote: Yes completely agree regarding publicity etc.what I had in mind was connecting the community nerve ending back together firstpublicity must wait for the foundation to be in place. Joseph Prof. em. Dr. med. Wolfgang Giere wrote: This is wonderful. But I would suggest not to raise publicity before it isn't clear that there will be people and support for a new MDC and which route to take. Better be coutious now than frustrated later! I have been member of the MDC and head of the German ISO delegation for years and could afford it thanks to my institute, the center of medical informatics of the university in Frankfurt. I am retired now, my deputy chairman, Wolfgang Kirsten is ill, not available for quite a while and I am afraid, many of other old hands are no more available. .Who would volunteer do it? In my opinion there would be three major activity blocks needed (provided we agree upon the need!) : - one development of the standard itself: Tough and tedious work requiring specialists. - one coaching the new standard within the international bodies: Requires contacts, convincing personalities, comittee meetings, much support, time, and effort - one development of the case (probably VistA) in the minds of people, societies, govenment agencies, ... This needs PR at it's best. Probably there should be some few activists coordination the efforts, structuring the cooperation etc. Wolfgang Giere Wolfgang Giere Joseph Dal Molin wrote: I have just returned from Brasil where I gave a worskshop on open source in health informatics. I was invited by the Brasilian Health Informatics Society and as a result have made some good friends and excellent contacts. I will contact both the current and past president of the Society as well as colleagues in Sao Paolo to inform them of this discussion. What this will need is a small team of midwives and lots of publicity and support. With a team in place I will table a motion at our next WorldVistA board meeting to support to this effort. I should think that the VSA would want to do the same as well as the Pacific Telehealth Hui. We can then use press releases etc. to get the word out we have good access to reporters several trade journals etc. We can also use other medical informatics forums such as the openhealth listand submit to Slashdot. Also all the medical informatics schools should also be contacted. Unfortunately all I can offer is to help launch this group, I have no expertise in M at allbut I do have a great deal of experience building communities of this kind in health informatics. Cheers, Joseph Prof. em. Dr. med. Wolfgang Giere wrote: I fully agree with Arden Forrey's remarks. It was a shame that the Millenium Standard did not happen. It took us a long march through the institutions to make Mumps an ISO-Standard. To revive MDC as official body can be done either using the old ANSI-affiliation or through a ISO WG (that would be the normal way). Both ways reuire international participation. I suppose, MUG Germany would be willing to participate (I cannot ask my successor Wolfgang Kirsten, he is hospitalized right now). Also I guess, Frans Witte (Netherlands) could be reactivated. Ion Diamond in GB? I do not know whether he is still active in the field. But there is a new commercial Mumps available in GB. Finland? I do not know the actual state of M-use there. What about South America? Could George Timson trigger participation? I once visited M-using hospitals in Sao Paulo and might be able to find out. We should get NEW people. I did not follow the ISO-story. Is the standard sustained? I have been asked in Germany and suggested to
Fwd: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re: [Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye Mumps
Here is another message from Chris Richardson. Wolfgang; I couldn't agree with you more. We need to take a slightly different tactic in starting/reviving the MDC. Let us first take a look at why it faltered so that we understand the pitfalls we must overcome; 1) Deliberation was exhaustively slow in that many of us were working on this effort only sporadically. Many issues got forgotten and had to be recovered. We started to do better in the last couple of years, but more streamlined efforts need to be investigated 2) Loss of funding/support by MUG contributors and member organizations 3) The MDC was looked on as an Ivory Tower. We need to have more eyes on the problems and suggestions added to make the solutions smoother. To these issues, I personally would prefer that we investigate the use of something like the IEEE RFC (Request For Comment) as a model for airing the proposals. This allows lots of eyes to examine the issue and a lot of folks thinking about solutions. Each RFC has a champion or a group of champions who are identified as the focus point for considering the solutions and re-issuing the RFC. Each RFC has a period of review by the public which is finite. This gives a bit more timely resolution to the problems and keeps a history of the discoveries and ideas. This approach can be extended to web structure so that all have access to the ideas and progress of these ideas. Progress will be made as individuals get involved and make comment. We need to be inclusive and self-enrolling by participation. The champions make report to the subcommittees of the MDC. he RFC has the deliberation already documented and a specification has been presented, and a sample implementation has been modeled. All issues should have resolved by the time the RFC gets to the Subcommittee and the job of the Subcommittee is to integrate the RFC into the published standard. It will be those changes to the standard which are finally passed to the full MDC to authorize and then release. Much of this work can happen from the web and email without much face to face effort. As such, much of the deliberation has a paper trail and history. The possibilities are numerous and exciting. Best wishes; Chris Richardson - Original Message - From: Prof. em. Dr. med. Wolfgang Giere [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 8:28 AM Subject: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re: [Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye Mumps This is wonderful. But I would suggest not to raise publicity before it isn't clear that there will be people and support for a new MDC and which route to take. Better be coutious now than frustrated later! I have been member of the MDC and head of the German ISO delegation for years and could afford it thanks to my institute, the center of medical informatics of the university in Frankfurt. I am retired now, my deputy chairman, Wolfgang Kirsten is ill, not available for quite a while and I am afraid, many of other old hands are no more available. .Who would volunteer do it? In my opinion there would be three major activity blocks needed (provided we agree upon the need!) - one development of the standard itself: Tough and tedious work requiring specialists. - one coaching the new standard within the international bodies: Requires contacts, convincing personalities, comittee meetings, much support, time, and effort - one development of the case (probably VistA) in the minds of people, societies, govenment agencies, ... This needs PR at it's best. Probably there should be some few activists coordination the efforts, structuring the cooperation etc. Wolfgang Giere Wolfgang Giere Joseph Dal Molin wrote: I have just returned from Brasil where I gave a worskshop on open source in health informatics. I was invited by the Brasilian Health Informatics Society and as a result have made some good friends and excellent contacts. I will contact both the current and past president of the Society as well as colleagues in Sao Paolo to inform them of this discussion. What this will need is a small team of midwives and lots of publicity and support. With a team in place I will table a motion at our next WorldVistA board meeting to support to this effort. I should think that the VSA would want to do the same as well as the Pacific Telehealth Hui. We can then use press releases etc. to get the word out we have good access to reporters several trade journals etc. We can also use other medical informatics forums such as the openhealth listand submit to Slashdot. Also all the medical informatics schools should also be contacted. Unfortunately all I can offer is to help launch this group, I have no expertise in M at all
