The project URL is here: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox_OS/MedicalPlatformProject To create this bug to collect engineering works. This bug should be a meta bug.

Hi Kevin, Is there any platform(say etherpad, gdocs or something), where we are planning out the features, priorities, use case etc. I would suggest, etherpad will pe good place to start with, so that we can collaborate easily. Mailing list is for communication purpose. Thanks

Yes, definitely. I created a Google document to collect our requirements: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XWK7Yd9Rq7f7p--wLCpPBYkaC3oyq9_vWii2Vi_khdg/edit We can discuss the user scenario here, and/or in the mailing list. The visibility in Bugzilla might be higher than in the mailing list.

Let me explain the idea of this project again here, and also put some comments here. Hopefully, it can raise some suggestions from all of you. The idea of this project is to provide an easy to use operating system for elders or whoever needs a good way to monitor their body status, and get advises from doctors. Then, users don't need to stay with doctors very closely in order to get health care. Also, this system provides a better way for all medical service provider to provide personalize medical health care. We are now collecting user scenarios. In my opinion, 1. The home screen may provide something like dashboard that displays an overview status of the user. 2. This system needs a mechanism to protect user data. User account is required. 3. It needs a good way for doctor(s) to log-in from another device, read the data collected for the user, and input some advises that can be sent to the operating system and showed to the user. 4. Notifications with urgent issues, or serious condition can be displayed on the screen, maybe come with vibration. 5. Voice input would be great given it might be not easy to type under some urgent situations. 6. BLE support is required, because lots of medical devices transfer data via bluetooth. After discussing with Dr. Tan from Singapore, to have this system built in a wearable is much better than in a mobile phone. Then, we don't need to ask patients(or users, especially elders) to carry a device with him/her. Comments or suggestions are always welcome.

7. And, of course, this operating system needs to be able to integrate with all other web-based medical apps easily. It may also have some preloaded medical apps.

Thanks Kevin to explain the proposed plan in detail. Other than what you said, i would like to add few points to it. 1. This project is more like to create gaia apps (by consuming the api available from b2g as much we can in favor of medical patients) which is relevant to patients and remove the existing apps of gaia which doesn't make sense to patients or use those existing stuff of gaia to built which can benefit the patients (let's say instead of normal dialer apps, we can customize it to for contacting doctors or emergency situation ). I assume we don't have to modify the Firefox OS much on system level. Let's say for example, there is no use of music or gallery apps for patients, so we need to replace it with apps(as preinstalled) ones. 2. We can add some hardware to device (so, related apps too) to detect/measure the patient conditions (which ever is possible, like heartbeat etc, just for example). 3. IMO, we should start this with mobile device, instead of wearables. If we start wearables, then it may narrow down the exploration of different possible idea. Once we get stable device, we can start with wearable (as in wearable, the UI/UX and to present more info in small screen is crucial, so once with get a clear picture and stable os for mobile device, we can start with wearables). Thanks

Also, is it possible to get a introduction with developers who is working on this project, so that we can prepare user story, use case, Road Maps etc? Even adding those devs to that google docs works good for me.

To give us some ideas, here is an example of a mobile app that provides clinical services at a distance. https://clinicloud.com/ Clinicloud was written up in "Med Device Online" http://www.meddeviceonline.com/doc/clinicloud-allows-doctors-patients-to-monitor-vital-signs-through-smartphone-apps-0001

(In reply to kumar rishav (:rishav_) from comment #5) > > 2. We can add some hardware to device (so, related apps too) to > detect/measure the patient conditions (which ever is possible, like > heartbeat etc, just for example). Yes, that's included in the plan. Before this happens, we can do whatever we should do to allow the platform to connect devices that provide such detection. But, one problem is, most medical devices come with their own apps. Their apps can retrieve the data from their devices of course. Even they use common protocol like BLE and we can also get the data, the problem is we don't have the definition of the data. But, maybe that's not the area we should touch, as long as our platform allows their apps to be ported to this platform. > > 3. IMO, we should start this with mobile device, instead of wearables. If we > start wearables, then it may narrow down the exploration of different > possible idea. Once we get stable device, we can start with wearable (as in > wearable, the UI/UX and to present more info in small screen is crucial, so > once with get a clear picture and stable os for mobile device, we can start > with wearables). Now, we don't have such wearable device. So, wearable could be a long term plan. We can definitely work on mobile first. Next, we can use emulator to simulate the environment of wearable. Talked with Hsinyi and her team members. This should be doable. > > Thanks

I think we can have this project planned as the following phase: Phase 1. Work on mobile devices. Phase 2. Before working on wearable, we can work on emulator. Phase 3. Work on wearable devices. Sounds good to everyone here?

Yeah, Sounds good. Also it will be nice if we can have an IRC or slack channel so that we can communicate among the developers and plan out the architecture of apps. As we are in initial phase, async communication (like Bugzilla or Mail) won't be enough. we should/need to have direct communication channel so that we can have meeting over irc/slack.

Yes, we have an IRC channel here: #fxos-medical-platform

Correct me if I am wrong. 1. Mobile Device = Utility Apps that can read data from existing wearables/devices including the one we will have in future, also User can manually put in data or by Voice. 2. Wearable Device = With sensors and medical readers which will transmit data to the Mobile Device's Utility Apps. If we are planning for wearables or the hardware like for reference the one on CliniCloud then the OS will defer from the one we will be customising from Gaia for mobile, like Android Wearable OS and Android OS defer a lot from each other. Also, I don't understand the need of removing the preloaded System Apps(in favour of removing those that doesn't make sense) from the OS for Mobile Version of this. If the OS is going on Mobile, then it should work like a Mobile. I think the idea of Mobile + Wearable is diffused together which doesn't fits well with the product that we are thinking about. So, basically for the Mobile Version of the Product, we are building Utility Apps which can pick data from already existing wearables/devices in market and further in future pick data from the wearable device for which we will build the OS. OR If I am completely wrong, then I guess we are building OS for a "Utility Device", just like iPods which in future will be sent together with a wearable device.

Hi, Dron, sorry to reply it late. (In reply to Dron Rathore from comment #12) > > Also, I don't understand the need of removing the preloaded System Apps(in > favour of removing those that doesn't make sense) from the OS for Mobile > Version of this. If the OS is going on Mobile, then it should work like a > Mobile. We are not trying to remove the system app, but may to modify it to fit the needs in this project. Greg is the one to provide the suggestion, and he may have better comments than me. > > I think the idea of Mobile + Wearable is diffused together which doesn't > fits well with the product that we are thinking about. The idea is not to have mobile + wearable. So far, the plan is to have the system running on wearable. But, if there is significant benefits to have mobile + wearable, we definitely should include it into our plan. > > So, basically for the Mobile Version of the Product, we are building Utility > Apps which can pick data from already existing wearables/devices in market > and further in future pick data from the wearable device for which we will > build the OS. What we discussed earlier is to have this system running as an operating system, at least, it should be running like this, meaning, once a mobile device is booted up, it goes to the system with simple-to-use UI automatically. > > OR > > If I am completely wrong, then I guess we are building OS for a "Utility > Device", just like iPods which in future will be sent together with a > wearable device. The idea is to provide an operating system that can be run on wearable devices for medical usage. But, of course, it's worthy to explore the benefits to also work on something like utility app that users can install it on other operating systems(or Firefox OS only), and/or to provide a mobile version of the system.

Learning from history makes it looks like a bad idea to integrate *all* the things into System app, like UI elements which always cause performance trouble since main thread will be stuck by updating the app's UI, not to mention those "background processes" like stuff. Also, we the project team previously agreed that the complicated UX of current Gaia is not suitable for a domain specific usage with just a very simple start, particularly those inherited from long ago decision that one of our major partner only required a "cheap Android". Therefore, what the suggestion is that we should keep System app as simple as possible, regarding the current opinions accumulated from the Gaia's past. So that to keep System app as headless is the first step, which doesn't mean we need to remove the System app but to make it fits our needs, although this might signify that we couldn't and shouldn't use lots of current System app's UI stuff.

1. As we had more discussion[1], I'm going to add some bugs for our current idea of Eir's POV (and link them to this meta one). 2. In the mean time I also plan to re-arrange dependencies of all Eir relevant bugs, in order to give the community a more friendly and structured view of our intended work in Eir. [1] All Eir meeting notes are here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TQRfJYBNp8qO8oLx5gsah2Fy4dlapBXWXur2KzxXa84/edit#heading=h.529cn2dvlvy3

btw I would suggest to utilize the "dependency tree" view of this bug[1], to have get an overall picture of this root meta bug. [1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/showdependencytree.cgi?id=1223309&hide_resolved=1 (In reply to Wesly Huang (TAM) from comment #15) > 1. As we had more discussion[1], I'm going to add some bugs for our current > idea of Eir's POV (and link them to this meta one). > 2. In the mean time I also plan to re-arrange dependencies of all Eir > relevant bugs, in order to give the community a more friendly and structured > view of our intended work in Eir. > > [1] All Eir meeting notes are here: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/ > 1TQRfJYBNp8qO8oLx5gsah2Fy4dlapBXWXur2KzxXa84/edit#heading=h.529cn2dvlvy3

Hi, Andre, after working on this project for months, we realized that it's not really related to Firefox OS. That's why we removed "Firefox OS" wording. Do you see something different? Thank you. https://wiki.mozilla.org/Eir

This is no longer a Mozilla project anymore. Closed this case. But this is still an open source project and some people including me, are still working on this. If anyone who is interested in joining us, please visit our Github: https://github.com/OpenIoMeT/iomet/wiki, or send mails to me: kaichih.hu@gmail.com.