Chris, Thanks. Go for it! As you may recall from one of my earliest messages to this list, I strongly suggested that this effort needed a glossary so that all of us can use terms that have the same semantic definition for all of us.
Would you like to be the starter and keeper of this project glossary? Rachel -----Original Message----- From: Christopher J. Feahr, OD [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2002 5:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Requirements Gathering Hi Rachel, I would be glad to begin working on a draft list of specific terms and definitions for this project. Can we start with Ron's proposed interchange sender/receiver definitions? >>INTERCHANGE(ISA) SENDER: Entity responsible for preparing the transaction sets (ST/SE) into functional groups (GS/GE) and interchange controls (ISA/IEA) for transmission to the INTERCHANGE RECEIVER and for resolving a functional acknowledgment (997) that contains errors regarding the interchange. >> >>INTERCHANGE RECEIVER: Entity responsible for processing the function group and transaction sets (GS/GE, ST/SE) within an interchange control (ISA/IEA) and sending a functional acknowledgment (997) back to the ISA SENDER.<< -Chris At 07:42 PM 2/8/02 -0600, you wrote: >Over the last several weeks there's been excellent discussion and >"brainstorming" taking place on this list. Now it's time to get more >focused, specifically on requirements determination. > >It seems that I've volunteered to lead the EDI Addressing & Identifiers >subgroup responsible for policy and requirements. Accordingly, I'd like to >begin the process of collecting requirements. However, I think that a good >approach to requirements gathering would be to begin the process of >describing the many different scenarios that will need to be addressed for >each of these two key activities: EDI Addressing and Identifiers. > >Towards that end I'd like to request submissions of various scenarios that >will need to be supported. Can we begin by using this format: > >For each scenario: > --specify whether it is an EDI Addressing or Identifier scenario > --identify the players (e.g., provider, clearinghouse, payer, TPA, PPO, >etc.) involved > --describe the scenario, e.g., which party initiates the activity, what >are the various parties, their roles, the sequencing of their involvement > --describe the outcome of a successful scenario > >After a reasonable period of time I'll try to put each of the scenarios >submitted into a formalized template/document so that the more detailed >effort of requirements determination can begin. > >Please start the subject of each message as follows so that I can group and >management each message: > >Scenario: EDI Addressing >or >Scenario: Identifiers > >Thanks, > >Rachel > >Rachel Foerster >Principal >Rachel Foerster & Associates, Ltd. >Professionals in EDI & Electronic Commerce >39432 North Avenue >Beach Park, IL 60099 >Phone: 847-872-8070 >Fax: 847-872-6860 >http:/www.rfa-edi.com Christopher J. Feahr, OD http://visiondatastandard.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell/Pager: 707-529-2268
