Difference between revisions of "Review Process"

From QIBA Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 15: Line 15:
 
===Criteria for Public Comment===
 
===Criteria for Public Comment===
 
* All open issues have been clearly listed
 
* All open issues have been clearly listed
* Candidate resolutions have been selected for most/all issues and drafted into the Profile
 
* All major mechanisms and profile details are clear/complete enough to implement
 
 
* Some groundwork projects may be underway
 
* Some groundwork projects may be underway
 +
* Candidate resolutions have been selected for most/all issues and drafted into the Profile
 +
* All major mechanisms and profile details are mostly clear/complete enough to implement
 +
* It is clear what is required for a system/organization to claim compliance with the Profile
 +
* Compliance requirements are sufficient to accomplish the goal of the profile
  
 
===Criteria for Trial Implementation===
 
===Criteria for Trial Implementation===
* All major mechanisms and profile details are clear/complete enough to implement
 
 
* Few, if any, groundwork projects remain active
 
* Few, if any, groundwork projects remain active
 +
* All major mechanisms and profile details are clear/complete enough to implement
 +
* It is clear what is required for a system/organization to claim compliance with the Profile
 +
* Compliance requirements are sufficient to accomplish the goal of the profile
  
 
===Criteria for Publication===
 
===Criteria for Publication===
Line 27: Line 31:
 
* All major mechanisms and profile details have been tested in the field
 
* All major mechanisms and profile details have been tested in the field
 
* Groundwork projects are complete
 
* Groundwork projects are complete
 +
* All major mechanisms and profile details are clear/complete enough to implement
 +
* It is clear what is required for a system/organization to claim compliance with the Profile
 +
* Compliance requirements are sufficient to accomplish the goal of the profile

Revision as of 14:30, 28 January 2011

It's basically the same review process prior to releasing for Trial Implementation or Publication (and if we want to be good, before Public Comment).

Remember, this is the QA point. It doesn't have to be perfect. It does have to be good.

Review and Approval

  • Judge the document to be fit for the next phase (Authoring Committee)
  • Schedule review meeting with Modality Committee
  • Submit document 1 week before review meeting (Authoring Committee)
  • Line-by-line review (Modality Committee)
    • Walkthrough led by lead author
    • Resolve questions/comments/clarifications from Modality Committee
  • Record vote to approve the document as fit for the next phase (Modality Committee)


Criteria for Public Comment

  • All open issues have been clearly listed
  • Some groundwork projects may be underway
  • Candidate resolutions have been selected for most/all issues and drafted into the Profile
  • All major mechanisms and profile details are mostly clear/complete enough to implement
  • It is clear what is required for a system/organization to claim compliance with the Profile
  • Compliance requirements are sufficient to accomplish the goal of the profile

Criteria for Trial Implementation

  • Few, if any, groundwork projects remain active
  • All major mechanisms and profile details are clear/complete enough to implement
  • It is clear what is required for a system/organization to claim compliance with the Profile
  • Compliance requirements are sufficient to accomplish the goal of the profile

Criteria for Publication

  • All open issues have been resolved
  • All major mechanisms and profile details have been tested in the field
  • Groundwork projects are complete
  • All major mechanisms and profile details are clear/complete enough to implement
  • It is clear what is required for a system/organization to claim compliance with the Profile
  • Compliance requirements are sufficient to accomplish the goal of the profile