2009-05-12 TSC WGM Minutes

From HL7 TSC
Jump to navigation Jump to search

TSC Tuesday Luncheon for May 2009 WGM

back to TSC Minutes and Agendas

Tuesday May 12, 12:30 – 1:30 PM Room G

Call to order 12:59 PM

  • Roll Call: Calvin Beebe, Woody Beeler, Jim Case, Marc Koehn, Lynn Laakso, Ken McCaslin, Charlie McCay, John Quinn
  • Additions to agenda: Ballot Plan and Document Cover Page Review
  • Agenda
    1. Harmonization Process model
      • Place where people formally submit proposals such that they can be reviewed and tracked.
      • From Woody’s email
        1. assures the comments/proposals have been received
        2. Makes these comments available to (viewable) others who wish to comment
        3. Assures that the consideration/action/reconciliation (call it what you want) will be documented, including a summary of the result.
        4. Makes these reconciliation documents available to all commenters
        5. Ideally sends the result of (3) out to the individual commenter by e-mail.
      • There is a Harmonization web-site (and mail list) that documents receipt of each proposal, and affords ability to download these. Harmonization carries out 3 & 4, but does not do 5, except as all results are posted for download and the posting is announced on the list server. (The assumption is that the submitter is on the Harmonization list server.
      • Mike Kingery could probably make this function happen for #5 for harmonization. Don’t want it to be like ballot site; something simpler.
      • Need to address both the disposition of comments process and the final approval. Harmonization does not address a single document, just 85 individual issues.
      • McCay identified if 30 change proposals exist for one cycle, and we *must* publish each cycle, what happens if people run out of time. Woody says the current process needs four weeks before the WGM.
      • Does ArB need to send out a document of issues with known or unknown resolutions as a report out of the process? The process usually does not allow the final product to be posted while still at the f2f meeting. Known issues should have a target date when they’re not ready, things we have agreed to but not yet completed…
      • Harmonization meeting prior to January occurs earlier than four weeks due to U.S. Holidays e.g. Thanksgiving.
      • As a draft process for people to review it is sufficient. Calvin would like a stronger endorsement process for the harmonization process to come out at a later time.
      • Message is needed that we are committed to getting a new architecture out and this is the process we’re going to start with to get there.
    2. Agenda for Weds Q3 reviewed from Marc’s email.
      • Woody indicates that in Orlando we agreed to drop the SA from the SAEAF, so that it is simply the Enterprise Architecture Document. Woody made motion and withdrew to make name change – timing of only one day left to present and the inventory of material using SAEAF name.
      • Calvin suggests we remove the alpha criteria. Marc suggests that we change it to a report on where we are with the alpha projects already come forward, i.e. a brief alpha update.
    3. ISO/CEN/HL7 tracking.
      • How do we get information on what’s out there so we’re not blindsided…
      • This list (ISO_and_JIC_projects) looks like just HL7-sponsored projects. Missing IDMP, Med Prod and Dev list. Need to notify the cochairs and affiliates lists if anything changes.
      • John notes that missing JIC documentation due to Audrey’s vacation. Charlie’s understanding was that decisions made should be posted before the meeting even adjourned.
    4. Technical Plan:
      • John sent to Mark and Karen, distributed to group.
      • Comment that Actionable National Initiatives plan has achieved a broader scope during discussions yesterday.
      • Ken’s information from last night’s update is all part of web site project Release 1. Electronic services roadmap on the Wiki.
      • Question on whether we can ‘go back to the well’ and request additional funds if necessary.
    5. Ballot plan and cover sheet review - TSC Tracker #1055
      • Cover sheet
        • Issue raised regarding get email bounce if you’re not on a list? Use an alias for each work group instead? W3C uses a public alias and a private alias.
        • Question is not how we do it, but is this what we want?
        • Question on whether we keep an email or just the URL of the work group, where additional information can be obtained.
        • Woody asks do we convert all the ballot title pages on the ballot site to this format? Address that in future.
        • Unanimously approved.
      • Ballot plan
        • Links to GOM, NIB, PFG so not trying to maintain current content in this document. Second version may be coming with publishing guide content, but would like to move forward with this first version.
        • Suggest providing definitions of the abbreviations; they are provided on the first page.
        • Suggest providing information on duration of ANSI standards (5-year life span), and DSTU renewal.
        • Unanimously approved. It will be added to the cochairs handbook.

Meeting adjourned 1:45 PM