[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: ebBP 11/29/2005: IHE Integration Profiles through ebBP...
See this progress with health care in using ebBP for electronic health records. 1. ebBP IHE Profile (draft): http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-bp/document.php?document_id=15649 2. ebBP Editor User's Guide (draft): http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-bp/document.php?document_id=15648 This is an important development to promote adoption of ebBP. What is of particular interest here is: 1. Leveraging registry/repository 2. Exercising the v2.0.1 advanced features 3. The draft editor under development 4. The importance of the patterns and semantic information in this domain (which are core capabilities in ebBP) I encourage your comments particularly on Asuman's questions and my responses. Their needs and questions are similar to those we have received from local UK government and textiles. Thanks. -------------------------------- Email response 28 November 2005 (Martin To Dogac, et al) Questions and comments recreated here: Asuman, first I commend you and your team on the progress thus far. I've reviewed the report in detail and will also do so for the editor user guide (tomorrow). See comments inline and at the end of this email on the report itself and (starting) answers to your specific questions below. Thank you very much. We are encouraged by your efforts. Regards. > dr. dogac: Dear Monica, > Here is a report on where we stand now and where we need > your help in integrating IHE Profiles through ebBP: > > 1. As you know, IHE has defined a number of of Integration > profiles describing collaborations among the IT systems > in Healthcare. However, an Integration Profile by itself is usually > not enough; > several different integration profiles must be used together > to handle the cases in real life. For example, the documents > stored in the ebXML registry/repository through IHE XDS Profile are > usually provided > as a result of executing "IHE Scheduled Workflow" profile and > hence XDS needs to work together with IHE Scheduled Workflow profile. > Furthermore, since security of patient information is very important, > other IHE Integration Profiles such as IHE Audit Trail and Node > Authentication (ATNA) > and Cross-Enterprise User Authentication (XUA) must be used in > conjunction with > the XDS profile. > > IHE addresses this "dependency" among different integration > profiles by "grouping" the necessary actors of the involved > profiles. "Grouping actors" means that the IT system(s) that represent > the involved actors must implement the mandatory transactions > of each of the actors. Although the result of this "grouping" > is a collaborative healthcare business process, IHE does not > attempt to define this process formally. mm1: This composability is quite important. It is more than just actors, though. It is composability of functions, technology, etc. (which was part of the original foundation and vision of ebXML) - composability of many technologies to enable heterogeneous environments. On profiles, this is timely because we (ebBP team) is now engaged with ebXML IIC to develop a profile based on their deployment template format. We have only just begun and this will be a complementary exercise for both efforts. Please see the recently approved Committee Draft for the CPA profile from ebXML IIC for reference: * TC page: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-iic/document.php?document_id=15200 * public: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=15200&wg_abbrev=ebxml-iic In addition, as previously indicated, we are engaged with UBL for the Small Business Subset to realize the modular, composable process definitions (profiles) you envision. See the latest draft of modular definitions under development from Stephen Green: * public: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200511/msg00067.html I would suggest there are multiple ways to approach this. What we have found is flexibility in composability is highly desirable (from textile, financial services, supply chain, local government, and now health care perspectives). First: * Modular definitions can be defined for: o logical business documents o transactions - Recognizing: + patterns used + signals desired + quality of service required - maps to your desires to associate business QoS to profiles that concretize the mechanisms to realize them o actors o rules * Modular definitions can be composed (in the context of the process and in support of other mechanisms (such as stated above): o Activities combined, nested or related. o Constraints and transitions defined. o Rules applied. + timing + documents and conditions expressions interrogating that data (internally and externally). For example, mechanisms such as CAM can be used. + semantic information (semantic variables) > dogac: 2. METU team has implemented an ebBP Editor, > to facilitate defining collaborative > healthcare business processes in ebBP. Enclosed > please find a draft of the ebBP Editor user guide. > We will highly appreciate your comments. > After we agree on the design and the content of the user > manual, it may be a good idea to put it on SourceForge > for public use. mm1: Grand idea! As indicated, I will review the user guide in quick order and also provide to the ebBP team for comment and suggestions, with your permission. > dogac: 3. What we intended to was, to define IHE Integration > Profiles like XDS, SW, etc. through this ebBP Editor tool and then > let the user select which actors it wishes to group and then > generate the whole business process in ebBP. > Enclosed please find a paper which describes the initial > steps but it not complete for the following reasons: > when we tried to define IHE Integration Profiles > through ebBP, we face the following problem: > every IHE transaction has a triggering event > which may be an external event such as an HL7 or a DICOM event > or a user initiated event. mm1: We have had similar and related questions from other user communities, whereby the functionality was there although we either needed to be more explicit and descriptive about its value and use or work more closely with adopters to implement. We wish to work with you in the same way. Several mechanisms exist to support externally influenced activities. For example: 1. Semantic variables: A semantic element supports the effective use of conditional constraints. The variable can be accessed by external elements. The businessTransactionActivityRef and businessDocumentRef point to what context and documents are relevant to Condition Expression evaluation. Variable assumes type, if any, from expression evaluation. This element, for example, could be associated with a logical Business Document. Given whether simple or complex variables are used, XPath or XSLT could be used, for example. This could allow externally driven mechanisms to be used. * Semantic variables can also enable use of externally defined timing constraints (TimeToPerform for example). 2. Condition expressions: Sometimes overlooked are the condition expression types BeginsWhen, EndsWhen, and Pre- and PostCondition. For example, these could be automated (I believe) to accomplish what you seek. BeginsWhen would trigger the start of an activity while the PreCondition could designate the condition that allows the activity to start. If the expression attribute is rendered as computable, the BSI may use these attributes at run-time. If desired, variables may also be used to further enable Pre- and PostCondition, BeginsWhen and EndsWhen elements, as they are of type ConditionExpressionType. For example, an XSLT variable may be used for these attributes and allow values to be placed in them. This will be a good opportunity to test these assumptions and also understand if any subsequent changes/improvements should be considered. > dogac: For example, admission of a patient (which is an external HL7 > trigger event) triggers > the first step of IHE Scheduled Workflow, namely, the > "IHE Admit/Register Patient" transaction > which informs the Order Placer about this patient. > However, the second step in the Scheduled Workflow, > which is "IHE New Order from Order Placer", > does not automatically start after the first step is > completed but it is initiated externally by a medical doctor > as in real life. > > We thought of capturing these external events through guards > in the ebBP definition. For example, we should be able to define a guard > for "IHE New Order from Order Placer" transaction which becomes true > when an external event becomes true (a physician enters an order). mm1: Yes, see previous comments. > However, it seemed to us that the current definition of > guards in ebBP do not naturally capture > external events. Is there something that we miss? > If not, it would be good if the draft is extended > to include mechanisms to naturally handle external events > in the ebBP. > > Note that in ebBP specification, it is stated that "when a transition > is validated, it > does not mean that the target Business Activity would start > immediately. It > means the Business Activity is enabled and will be initiated whenever > appropriate." Although this is stated, it is not clear to us how this > is realized. We think that it should be possible to initiate > a business activity or Collaboration Activity by explicitly stating > its guards. mm1: This is historic to the ebBP (ebXML BPSS), it realizes in a standard way the expected (even exceptional paths) activities that should occur. And those expectations can be monitored; the process definitions is computable and may be used at runtime rather than focused on an executable language. Dale may wish to add to these comments, and I expect we will have other inputs from our team. In addition, the sequences defined are expected and logical in nature, recognizing that at runtime the asynchronicity of the business messages may be different but guided by timing parameters and expectations, at a minimum. The condition guards, transitions, condition expressions and semantic variables are enablers to accomplish this. See previous comment such as the differences between BeginsWhen and PreCondition (trigger vs. enabled) as well. We would welcome suggestions on clarifying descriptive language to best communicate our intent and address your question. > dogac: Another observation is the following: IHE XDS is using > ebXML registry just as a "document registry" to store > parient healtcare records. However, > one of the main advantages and in fact reason of developing > ebXML is for the purpose of storing business processes > through ebXML registry. IHE is a very important industry > initiative, so if we can collaboratively show that it brings > added value for IHE Integrations profiles (workflows) > there may be a chance for them to adopt it. So it would be good > if we find or develop ways of expressing IHE Integration Profiles > in ebBP. mm1: An ebBP profile for ebXML Registry would also be a considered next step. I've cc: Farrukh Najmi here for information. > dogac: Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the > Deputy Head > of Unit of eHealth, Dr. Iakovidis and the Artemis Project officer, > Dr. Purcarea of the European Commission who are copied > in this email for sponsoring our work through the Artemis project. mm1: Likewise - here, here for the substantive work thus far. Asuman, is it acceptable to forward this work to the ebBP list for comment? Thank you. ========== Other comments on the ebBP paper (in addition to the initial comments and answers above): 1. Section 1: * Document Registry (as an Actor) would likely need to provide user defined signals (notifications that could be tracked) to enable Register Document Set. Same would apply for query functions. We do allow user-defined signals although they need to provide the base information expected for a Business Signal. * Quality of service expectations can be guided by DocumentSecurity and Quality aspects inherent in ebBP. These may be realized by tooling, Registry mechanisms, etc. * Grouping of Actors or even process definitions themselves in a composable way may be achieved via tools which is what is envisioned by UBL. Visibility is very important based on the business documents, process activities and actors so there may be more granularity that can be achieved here via the profile concepts (and as supported by the elements in ebBP). 2. Section 2.1: * ebXML BPSS = ebXML Business Process Specification Schema (short name ebBP). ebBP was coined after the actual TC name of ebXML Business Process TC. * As specified in the patterns matrices, business signals are highly recommended particularly for state alignment. However, we recognized that other mechanisms may be used. * Historically there have been differing opinions about Business Signals on a Response. The ebBP sees how important they are for state alignment. However, the UMM had indicated they were not part of the business collaboration protocol (i.e. they served as warnings). The operational criteria defined in ebBP further enables the BT patterns in the UMM. * There are 6 concrete patterns, 1 legacy pattern (for Legacy Business Transaction) and 1 fully extensible pattern (Data Exchange). You cite 6 and then list 8. Note that the core schema actually has typed the Business Transaction using BusinessTransactionType - it can be commercial or not (Commercial Transaction or Business Transaction respectively). This was specifically done to accommodate other than commercial intentional activities (such as for government - which is where we received the request). 3. Section 2.4: * 3. When Order Filler acknowledges the initiation of an Order, is the Order Status Update a Response or as an acknowledgement of the Order? This is important in the process definition and how the pattern (or which pattern) is used. If response to initiation of order, could use Business Transaction; if a separate Notification, the Notification pattern (as stated in your document). * 4. Do external events trigger th Query Modality Workflow List? Or is this driven by notifications by the Order Filler? Or are these periodic and nature? See previous comments on external events. * Exceptions can enable the additional issues you cite in this section. * See previous comments on logical sequence (expectations of the parties). This enables you to to use constraints, transitions and timing for example to manage. See improvements in v2.0.1 for semantic variables, condition expressions, and the latest externalDocumentDefRef (external source to apply business rules or additional semantics to a business document processing - real-world example UBL). * There are several key differences between WS-CDL and ebBP, some philosophical and others technical. CDL is based on a distributed computing model and is focused on web services for choreography. ebBP innately uses business semantics and mechanisms (such as semantic variables) and the international BT patterns - focusing on collaborating parties and business partners. This comment is not specifically related to the paper but focused on understanding these two capabilities, and at some point use of them in complementary ways. 4. Section 3.1: * Acknowledgements and exceptions are actually part of the patterns and business transactions themselves. Relevant references: Bob Glushko's book chapters that talk about large scale, inter-departmental collaboration: Chapter 9: http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/%7Eglushko/DocumentEngineeringBookDraft/DEBook/ch9_FINAL.pdf Chapter 10: http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/%7Eglushko/DocumentEngineeringBookDraft/DEBook/ch10_FINAL.pdf Actual book reference: http://www.docengineering.com/. Working drafts as a result of Public Review process: Spec (diff) http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-bp/document.php?document_id=15523 public: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=15523&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp Spec (r02) http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-bp/document.php?document_id=15524 public: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=15524&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp Document, Supplements http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-bp/document.php?document_id=15525 public: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=15525&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp Schema http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-bp/document.php?document_id=15526 public: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=15526&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp SignalSchema http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-bp/document.php?document_id=15528 public: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=15528&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp Document, Schema http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-bp/document.php?document_id=15529 public: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=15529&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp Document, SignalSchema http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-bp/document.php?document_id=15531 public: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=15531&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]