- - - - - - - -
I think there's a category confusion here. The NHIN Direct effort is
to provide the standards and services descriptions for the push model
of communication. Multiple organizations will enable those standards
and services, and I would expect that MiHIN would be one of those
enabling organizations for providers in Michigan. The goal of the NHIN
Direct project is *not* to stand up an HIO providing the services.
Instead, the goal is to standardize the mechanics, including:
1) How providers are addressed
2) How edge systems (installed EHRs, LISs, etc.) connect (send/receive
information for an address)
3) How enabling organization (server systems, including MiHIN) route
and
4) How content is packaged for transport (not what the content is, but
what the content wrapper is)
Arien
Regarding #4 - Are you, and this project, truly committed to the
separation of content standards from transport standards? I have not
seen that as the MO of the NHIN thus far. It would be quite refreshing
and may even renew my faith in federal HIT intervention.
Jason
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nhindirect-discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to nhindirec...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to nhindirect-disc...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nhindirect-discuss?hl=en.
Can we get some more participation in the wiki?
- - - - - - - -
> > nhindirect-disc...@googlegroups.com<nhindirect-discuss%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/nhindirect-discuss?hl=en.
>
> --
> Arien Malec
> Coordinator, NHIN Direct
That's great! It'll be interesting to hear as that happens whether the
user stories are supported and getting used.
> Can we get some more participation in the wiki?
I hear ya; I've been putting in some effort to make sure the contributions
flow in a somewhat logical way, fixing up names of pages and links.
Meanwhile Arien's rustling up the cavalry, and I expect we'll see more
activity soon. I'd like to make sure the structure of what we want to
build is thoughtful enough so that when that happens we make the most of
everyone's time.
Brian
Content and transport have been separated for a long time in the HITSP
specs, though of course they can be "packaged" together for particular
purposes (you need the full stack to actually exchange information).
I am not against simplicity, and in fact am strongly for it, and
believe there's lots of room to improve that simplicity,
accessibility, and understandability of specifications. I'm glad to
start participating in this Wiki and discussion forum. I'm also not
saying HITSP was perfect or simple enough, and that's water under the
bridge since a new organization and process to succeed HITSP will be
forthcoming per the ONC RFPs. But let's not throw the baby (of
previous consensus work from a lot of knowledgeable and dedicated
volunteers) out with the bathwater (the complexity), and let's not say
that things don't exist when they in fact do!
Thanks,
David
I agree with most of what's here, and I can assure there's no intent
for gratuitous invention. There's also no desire or goal to bash the
past (the title of a recent email) at all.
I've done an exercise in mapping XD* to the user stories and the
abstract model on the wiki, and would appreciate feedback and review
of that work.
See recent article: http://gcn.com/articles/2010/03/29/hhs-wiki-on-nhin-direct-airs-concerns-about-state-impacts.aspx
~Brian Ahier
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nhindirect-discuss" group.
> To post to this group, send email to nhindirec...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to nhindirect-disc...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nhindirect-discuss?hl=en.
>
>
--
Arien Malec
Coordinator, NHIN Direct