Versions Compared

Version Old Version 11 New Version Current
Changes made by

Ken Sayers

Ken Sayers

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

  • When all backlog items are adopted and implemented
  • move data to published when requested (this leads to massive duplication)

High Level Requirements

  • Privacy for Data Owners
    • carrier raw data is private
  • Data Quality for the Consumers
  • able to participate in the process
  • auditable participation in the process
  • carrier raw data is in a common format
  • data flow to final report must be secured

Backlog


DescriptionDecisionsAdoption StatusDate of StatusSpike/POC
Data VerificationHow do we verify the data is available for a data call / regulatory report?  This is not a measure of its quality (see below)
  • The verification that the data is available is made at the time of the extraction by the consenter.
  • The required data format/level/version is specified on the extraction.  This is effectively the requirement for the data.
  • By consenting to the extraction, the data owner asserts that the data meets the format/level/version requirements.
  • (Perhaps hold the result of the extraction for some period of time)



Data Quality ValidationWhat validation of the data is provided?  Is it all part of openIDL?  Is it shared across the community?  Is there some provided by the carrier/member?
  • For stat reporting, the stat-agent is required to validate the data for accuracy.
  • The validation rules are common and can be shared across all data owners.



Edit PackageSDMA provides a way to identify and fix errors as they occur before submission of the data.  Does this belong in the openIDL as a community component? If so, how do we provide that?
  • A reference implementation is made available for the etl that updates the HDS
  • The data owner is responsible for the implementation of the ETL
  • The data must meet certain levels of correctness (see SDMA for guidance)



Adapter Hosting ApproachThe adapter runs multiple components required by participants in openIDL.  How can we host these in member environments?
  • Software running in the Adapter is provided as Docker containers
  • The images are maintained in open source.  Members are free to vet and bring the images internally.
  • A mechanism for updates must be agreed upon.  This includes an SLA that describes the timeframe for absorbing updates.



Adapter ComponentsWhat are the components in the Adapter?



Extraction TechnologyWhat is the technology used to execute the extractions in the member environment?



Data Standard FormatWhat is the format for the data?  The data at rest in the HDS is the same or different from the data as it is being validated?
  • Every format has a name
  • Every format optionally has a level
  • Every format / level has a version
  • Every format level version has a document or section of a document that describes it
    • The fields are enumerated
    • Each field includes enough information on how to populate it
    • The standard for verification
      • Timeliness
      • Completeness
    • The standard for quality
      • Valid values for all fields
      • Percent of acceptable errors
    • Issue levels for each possible validation
    • The rules needed (in prose and/or in technology) to validate the data.



Harmonized Data Store and HistoryWhat history is maintained in the harmonized data store?  
  • Full history of transactional change
  • Snapshots that roll up the transaction
  • Do we prescribe the transaction model?
  • Need a staging database? Is this part of the openidl spec or only responsiblity of the carrier.
  • Do we agree that the HDS follows a "Data Vault" model?  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_vault_modeling



...