openIDS Work Group - 1/16/24
- Nathan Southern
Attendees
Peter Antley
Jim Bamberger
Sean Bohan
Jeff Braswell
Amanda Brine
Josh Hershman
Cory Isaacson
Andy Mielke
Catherine Myers
Lanaya Nelson
Mike Puchner
Andrew Regis
Ken Sayers
Michael Schwabrow
Michael Sullivan
Nathan Southern
Jennifer Tornquist
Greg Williams
Opening Logistics
Remarks/Agenda - Antitrust statement – Jenny
Agenda
Status on White Paper – Peter/Cory
Review White Paper Outline & assign authors to draft sections - Peter
Update on website/examples on how LF manages other projects – LF
Review/share draft of White Paper version as of 1/16 - Peter
Discuss proposed timeline revisions (original date 1/31) – Jenny/Jim
Discuss need to Create New Working Group for Data Standard – CLA/WG (white paper needs to explain the Data standard – need documentation for this) – Jenny/WG
Marketing Plan discussion-Lanaya
Press Release – content & timing
Debrief from Strategic meeting with Werner (if applicable)
Status of the CLA POCs:
Reg Reporting Phase 2 – status & next steps – Jenny/Greg
Informatica - CLA/Amanda
Pyramid - CLA/Jenny
Bordereau Reporting - Cory
Discussion
The meeting proceeded with updates on each of the above matters, as follows. (Accordingly, new action items have been assigned at the end of the document):
White Paper Discussion/Updates/Assignments
Item 1 (Peter Antley) an outline has been created and will be reviewed shortly; sections are being written (about 750 words so far) to flesh out that outline. A goal for today (in mtg.) is to assign different sections of the paper to different SMEs in the group.
Item 2 (Peter Antley) - assigning different sections of the paper to the group.
Section 1: A working introduction has been written by Peter right now, though he anticipates that it will grow and change
Section 2 - OIDS - describes what the open insurance data standard is all about. This begins with an initial problem statement - the issue OIDS is trying to solve; then it discusses what OIDS itself is and how OIDS can address said issues. - Peter is writing this, and Cory Isaacson has agreed to help him get the wording right; Peter will then write the explanatory statement about OIDS. Section 2 further breaks down in the screenshot below.
Within section 2, The LF Team (Sean, Nathan, Josh, Jeff - will work on c&d. The emphases will be How can I learn more about OIDS, and How is it managed?
Section 2e: Why do we need another data standard? - Peter has an initial draft, and he will ask the group to provide more content on this when the time is right.
Section 2f - Extensibility and how the core model works. Cloverleaf team will head this up.
Section 2g - Long-term prospects - Ken Sayers will author this.
Note: Peter also - per Jenny’s request - added a section 2b to the outline below, that will function as an openIDS value statement. Much of this will be culled from the Werner Kruck paper. Jenny and her team will author this, and it will grow organically out of sections 2a, b & c.
Section 3 will provide a case study (case study 1) of how OIDS makes regulatory reporting a better and more efficient experience. - Jenny Tornquist and Michael Payne and Michael Puchner
Section 4 will discuss a case study on Bordereau Reporting. the reThought group will write this.
Section 5 will focus on other potential case studies for OIDS. These have not yet been named/called out. One possibility would be data calls.
Section 6 will be a conclusion of the paper - Peter Antley will write this.
Update on the Website in Development and Ecosystem Efforts - Lanaya Nelson
The webpage OIDS is nearly ready to go live; Lanaya is in the process of drafting it. She will take screenshots of the layout and also the copy itself (which is based on Werner’s document) to the group for review.
A press release will also go out soon - and the site needs to be live for this to be issued; the press release ETA is the end of next week. She has quotes ready for that PR.
It was decided that - given the amount of time the main white paper is taking - Werner Kruck’s (AAIS) high level document will be used as the basis of ecosystem outreach, in order to get ecosystem/marketing activities underway sooner.
On this note: Lanaya already launched a CRM tracker with documented contacts from various organizations to whom she plans to reach out. The plan is for Lanaya to do the initial outreach to all contacts. If anyone in the group has added a contact and wants to be the one to take the lead with that individual, please feel free to do so, but copy Lanaya (lnelson@openidl.org) on the correspondence, so that she can follow the tracking and coordinate/setup follow up meetings.
The question arose from Cloverleaf of residual issues resulting from the timing of the reThought POC - it will not get underway until late February, and must be done. Should the white paper go to market only with what’s going on at AAIS, or would it make sense to hold off on the case studies and wait until everything is done? In response: Josh indicated the plan is to go to market now with the 4 page document Werner Kruck has authored. The group plans to loop organizations in earlier than the completion of the white paper and the accompanying POCs.
Rethought agreed fully and also stressed that the white paper itself can be issued ahead of the completion of the POCs - it is critical that when the POCs are done and issued, they are done correctly.
Item 3: The Linux Foundation Providing Examples of How other standards have been managed
Peter and Jeff have reviewed various data standards and discussed this matter - and Peter inquired about the frameworks for addressing various data standards
This is still on track. Sean plans to reach out to Jory Burson of the Joint Development Foundation, to set up a meeting to discuss this and get specific guidance.
Peter raised the question of how to term this effort when discussing it with others - if we’re not using the term open source, should we say something like ‘open standard that’s free to use under the Apache license?' How do we define this data standard? Again Sean agreed to follow up with Jory on this.
Peter re-raised the question of which governing bodies add new elements (such as telematics) to the given standard. Per Sean, this is all defined in the Governance model, and the process is the same as launching a new working group. It involves setting up the parameters for: what are the requirements, who are the approvers, how is it approved, how do we document that approval, and what, collectively, as the openIDL community, have determined for how it’s going to work.
Functionally, the OIDS group (per Josh) has the authority to create all of the rules and standards.
Item 4: White Paper Draft Logistics
Peter and Nathan set up a shared document draft that everyone can review, on the Google cloud.
Proposed timeline for white paper revisions. The original goal was to get a firm draft by the end of January; it was acknowledged that this is no longer realistic, and decided that mid-February is a suitable alternate (especially because the case studies will not yet be present in the first iteration published). Second week in February (2/14/25) is a tentative goal to strive for.
Item 5: Standards Discussions
Peter Antley and Jeff Braswell spent time over the past week reviewing data standards material over the last week, including the 175-page OMG data specification. It describes all aspects of the data standard.
Peter expressed the long-term need in this group for a data standard specification document, and then a longer-term plan to go beyond the document, constructing a data specification webpage that enables the user to look up information
On this basis, Peter proposed a separate working group focused to begin drafting this initial data standard specification document.
Counter to this, Josh Hershman pointed out that the group actually plans to adopt and open source a preexisting data standard by Cloverleaf- so this should be the chief focus and the sole priority, at least for now. There are several points of consideration per Josh.
We need to figure out the status of the contribution of the IP from Cloverleaf and to establish what the procedures are going to be surrounding the governance of data standards.
We need to hear back from Sean on the process of managing the data standards
Cloverleaf should be driving this component as they are most familiar with the data standards.
Only at this point does it make sense to have a separate group managing the data standards. But we are not there yet.
It will be critical to consult JDF throughout this process.
Cloverleaf reaffirmed that it is donating only its core model. They affirmed that they need clarity on how this will look.
While Cloverleaf knows the core (model), this group will be responsible for adding extensions for various lines of business; the core model is highly extensible.
Additional Discussion about Forthcoming Press Release
Lanaya clarified that the ETA on the press release is targeted for Wed./Thu of next week - and that the website needs to go live prior to the issuance of this.
Brief Update on the Cloverleaf POC for Regulatory Reporting Phase 2 - Jenny Tornquist
This is still a work in progress - two threads are going. The data solutions team is working with Cloverleaf on the Informatica side, while Jenny’s team is working on the Pyramid side.
Andy Mielke: His group has been working with Cloverleaf to get the POC of the flat files stored in an S3 bucket, and they used informatica to load this to the prestaging area of snowflake. Next, they will be transitioning from prestaging to staging. Data diagrams will be shared in another meeting in the near future.
The Bordereau POC is still in the early phases - targeted for end of February. Some internal development is being done now.
Action Items
Nathan Southern: Set up jointly edited documents for the white paper on Google drive and share access/link with OIDS Team
Peter Antley:
Finish writing the ‘what [OIDS] is’ statement from section 2 of the above outline
On section 2e of the white paper - ask the group to help further flesh this out by adding content, when the time is right.
Peter and Cory: Work together on getting the problem statement wording correct in the current white paper draft. Peter will get an email out to Cory to facilitate this by late this week or early next; Peter wants to work on the first three sections as an initial step.
Linux Foundation Team: Write parts c & d of section 2 in the white paper. The emphases will be How can I learn more about OIDS, and How is it managed?
Cloverleaf Team - Tackle section 2f of the white paper - on the subject of extensibility and how the core model works.
Ken Sayers - Author section 2g of the white paper - on long-term prospects. Anyone else in the group who wants to contribute to this, please do so.
Jenny Tornquist and her Team
Draft section 2(b) of the white paper, with the OIDS value statement.
Draft section 3 of the white paper, on case study #1 - also work on aligning the case study with the rest of the paper.
reThought Team - Draft section 4 of the white paper, on Bordereau report case study
Lanaya Nelson -
Send screenshots of the new OIDS webpage and extracts of the copy to the group for review and feedback.
Issue press release by the end of next week.
Reshare your CRM spreadsheet with the group. Anyone who wants to add to the contacts in this is encouraged to do so.
Initial ecosystem outreach to CRM contacts.
Sean reach out to Jory Burson of the Joint Development Foundation, to set up a meeting to discuss this and get specific guidance - and report back to the group. Also ask Jory and per Peter’s question: if we’re not using the term open source, should we say something like ‘open standard that’s free to use under the Apache license?' How do we define this data standard? And get concrete examples from the JDF on how Linux Foundation has managed other standards.
Josh, Sean and Nathan - Set up an initial discussion next week about the adoption of Cloverleaf’s data standard - the donation of their core model. Next steps would then be syncing up with JDF, sending out an email with recommendations, and ultimately setting up a standards working group.