Issue 2738: semantics of aliases in context of correlation manager (pids-rtf2) Source: (, ) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: Summary: I think the spec needs some narrative on the semantics of aliases. Specifically, it fails to point out that the receipt of an alias from a source domian does not necessarily imply that its value is to be used as an alias in the correlating domain. This clarification is important because if a VIP (say, the president) is anonymous under an alias in a source domain it might be entirely appropriate to treat that alais as a real name in the correlating domain. Similarly, the correlating domain should be free to maintain its own alias for persons independent of source domains. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: June 14, 1999: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== Reply-To: "Jon Farmer" From: "Jon Farmer" To: "pids-rtf2" Subject: 2738: Security Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 15:20:32 -0400 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 Proposed resolution is to add guidance narrative to the existing specification describing the reliability of External Ids and CorrelatedIDs. Insert an Appendix G: “Notes on Reliability of Identifiers and Profiles in PIDS”, with text as follows: In the systems integration topology of a large acute care facility, it is not uncommon to have 15 systems sharing their data using various middleware and messaging protocols. The accuracy of any element viewed in “system B” is only as good as the completeness and timeliness of the interfacing that delivers and maintains that element from its originating system. For example if system A reports person-adds but not updates ­ or merges but not unmerges ­ to the destination system, then the accuracy of that data in the destination is of suspect accuracy. If the source system is “recycling” person identifers it is critical that identifier deactivations or person removals are consistently communicated to all destinations. The exact same serious considerations hold true for an IdMgr, ProfileAccess, and CorrelationMGr implementations that receive Identifiers and profiles from their clients. Therefore while the PIDS specification introduces a new level of programming manageability by delivering identifier management functionality to client programs in an elegant fashion, the use of a PIDS implies no inherent gain or loss of accuracy of the data it presents to its clients.