Page tree

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 11 Next »

What are Service Acceptance Criteria (SAC)?

Service Acceptance Criteria (SAC) are used to assure that authored SNOMED CT content meets specific quality measures before the content can be promoted. The purpose of this is to ensure a specific level of quality is met at each promotion level. This in turn assures the quality of the content that is eventually promoted to the code system branch, with the benefit of minimising the quality checks required at that level (in general, the later the stage of the content release process, the greater the amount of work needed to correct any issues, so catching issues earlier in the process has many benefits).

SAC may be either automatic or manual. 

Automatic SAC are checks which the system can sign off automatically without user intervention.

Manual SAC are checks that require sign-off via a particular user interaction, with that interaction governed by role-based access controls.

SAC may also be mandatory or optional.

Mandatory SAC block branch promotion until their required conditions are satisfied.

Optional SAC do not block promotion, but best practice would be to inform the Project Manager and/or Project Lead of reasons for promoting without the check being satisfied (an example may be a task-level spelling check, which might depend on the nature of the content being changed, and the availability of related spell-checking resources).

Service Acceptance Criteria and Authoring Acceptance Gateway Architecture (Authoring Platform)

Service Acceptance Criteria are components in a technical architecture solution which includes the Authoring Acceptance Gateway (AAG) and various data stores associated with acceptance and sign-off of content changes for promotion via AP tasks and projects, and also for the generation and packaging of SNOMED CT releases.

The following schematic illustrates the subset of this architecture directly related to AP features and their inter-relationships and dependencies (components relating to release preparation and packaging are omitted here for clarity, but are essential aspects of the overall technical architecture):

Service Architecture - AAG - SAC

SAC are defined at the global level by users with the ADMIN role, as are their mapping to required RBAC roles. This is currently constrained as a technical support feature.

Globally defined SAC are then available as an options list to those with relevant permissions (set by RBAC role group definitions on the branch or its parents), to decide which to include in task-level or project-level gateway controls.

SAC are presented as checklist items in either the task details (for task level SAC) or project page (for project level SAC). The ability to modify the manual items to check them off via the AP user interface is a permission granted by the role assigned to each item in the SAC list. Task level manual SAC are usually available to the AUTHOR role. Some project level manual SAC may also be available to the AUTHOR role, but many will require PROJECT_MANAGER or PROJECT_LEAD role to update (specific role mappings are set in the SAC global configuration definitions).

Some aspects of acceptance gateway controls are implicit in the AP branch promotion process - for instance diverged content branches cannot be promoted: each branch must be rebased from its immediate parent branch with all merge conflicts resolved before the branch can be promoted.

Authoring Acceptance Gateway 1: Task Level SAC examples

task-early-visibility
task-manual-spellcheck
task-review-changes

Authoring Acceptance Gateway 2: Project Level SAC examples

project-case-significance
project-documentation-completed
project-duplicate-terms
project-final-signoff
project-inactivations-associations
project-lead-signoff
project-mrcm
project-new-descriptions
project-patterns-report
project-release-issues
project-release-validation-report-clean
project-template-validation
project-validation-clean
project-whitelist-review

  • No labels