Difference between revisions of "Review Process"

From QIBA Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 11: Line 11:
 
** Record vote to approve the document as fit for the next phase (as quorum of regular attender list maintained by RSNA staff)
 
** Record vote to approve the document as fit for the next phase (as quorum of regular attender list maintained by RSNA staff)
  
===Criteria for Public Comment===
+
===Criteria for publishing Public Comment draft===
 
* All open issues have been clearly listed
 
* All open issues have been clearly listed
 
* Some groundwork projects may be underway
 
* Some groundwork projects may be underway
Line 19: Line 19:
 
* Compliance requirements are sufficient to accomplish the goal of the profile
 
* Compliance requirements are sufficient to accomplish the goal of the profile
  
===Criteria for Trial Implementation===
+
===Criteria for publishing Reviewed draft===
 
* 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
 
* All major mechanisms and profile details are clear/complete enough to implement
Line 25: Line 25:
 
* Compliance requirements are sufficient to accomplish the goal of the profile
 
* Compliance requirements are sufficient to accomplish the goal of the profile
  
===Criteria for Publication===
+
===Criteria for publishing Tested draft===
 
* All open issues have been resolved
 
* All open issues have been resolved
 
* All major mechanisms and profile details have been tested in the field
 
* All major mechanisms and profile details have been tested in the field

Revision as of 02:50, 20 August 2012

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 (Technical Committee)
    • Schedule review meeting(s) as needed with open committee
    • Submit document 1 week before review meeting
    • Line-by-line review/walkthrough led by editor
    • Resolve questions/comments/clarifications
    • Record vote to approve the document as fit for the next phase (as quorum of regular attender list maintained by RSNA staff)

Criteria for publishing Public Comment draft

  • 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 publishing Reviewed draft

  • 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 publishing Tested draft

  • 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