2009-11-23 TSC Call Minutes

TSC - Technical Steering Committee

Monday, November 23, 2009 11:00 AM (US Eastern Time, UTC -5)
To participate, dial 770-657-9270 and enter pass code 124466#
GoToMeeting at https://www.gotomeeting.com/join/165215206
GoToMeeting ID: 165-215-206 

back to TSC Minutes and Agendas

Agenda

Apologies

• Ken McCaslin
• Ioana Singureanu

Meeting Admin

Meeting Attendance - :

At	Name	Affiliation	Email Address
x	Calvin Beebe	HL7 SSD SD	cbeebe@mayo.edu
x	Woody Beeler	HL7 FTSD Alternate	woody@beelers.com
	Charles Jaffe	HL7 CEO	cjaffe@HL7.org
x	Marc Koehn	invited Guest, HL7 EA IP PM	marc.koehn@gpinformatics.com
x	Austin Kreisler	HL7 DESD	austin.j.kreisler@saic.com
x	Lynn Laakso (scribe, non-voting)	HL7 HQ	lynn@hl7.org
	Ken McCaslin	HL7 TSS SD	Kenneth.H.McCaslin@QuestDiagnostics.com
x	Charlie McCay (chair)	HL7 TSC Chair	charlie@ramseysystems.co.uk
x	Charlie Mead	HL7 ArB	Charlie.mead@booz.com
x	Ravi Natarajan	HL7 Affiliate	Ravi.Natarajan@nhs.net
x	Ron Parker	HL7 ArB Alternate	rparker@infoway-inforoute.ca
x	John Quinn	HL7 CTO	jquinn@hl7.org
x	Gregg Seppala	HL7 SSD SD Alternate	gregg.seppala@va.gov
	Ioana Singureanu	HL7 FTSD	ioana@eversolve.com
x	Helen Stevens	HL7 TSS SD Alternate	helen.stevens@shaw.ca
x	Ed Tripp	HL7 DESD Alternate	Edward.tripp@estripp.com

1. Accept Agenda – accepted by general consent

Guest discussion:

• DCM issues, see TSC Issue # 890, on Consistency of Clinical content and overlap; no discussion

Agenda continued

1. Approve Minutes from 2009-11-16_TSC_Call_Minutes –Helen moved to approve, second by Woody, unanimously approved.
2. Review action items –
   1. Alternate ballot open date requests from ballot approvals (missed this on last week's agenda, sorry!)
      • HL7 Implementation Guide for Clinical Document Architecture, Release 2 - Level 3: Neonatal Care Report, Release 1 (US Realm) – Structured Documents WG. WG requests alternate ballot open date of 12 December. This is a stand-alone document that does not require processing by HQ.
      • HL7 Implementation Guide for Clinical Document Architecture, Release 2: Procedure Note, Release 1 – Structured Documents WG. WG requests alternate ballot open date of 12 December. This is a stand-alone document that does not require processing by HQ.
      • HL7 Implementation Guide for Clinical Document Architecture, Release 2: Unstructured Documents, Release 1 – Structured Documents WG. WG requests alternate ballot open date of 12 December. This is a stand-alone document that does not require processing by HQ.
      • HL7 Version 3 Standard: Privacy, Access and Security Services (PASS) Architecture Framework, Release 1 – SOA WG. WG requests alternate ballot open date of 12 December. This is a stand-alone document that does not require processing by HQ.
      • Privacy, Access and Security Services (PASS) - Access Control, Release 1 – SOA WG. WG requests alternate ballot open date of 12 December. This is a stand-alone document that does not require processing by HQ.
      • Helen asked if they would all close on the same date as the standard date. Woody thought they would. She asks if the norm can be established that stand-alone documents that do not require processing by HQ automatically get a week longer to ballot open date. Perhaps there are other committees that could take advantage of this extra window that should be.
      • Woody moves, Helen second. Motion to approve alternate ballot dates unanimously approved.
      • Helen moves that if Publishing and HQ approve, alternate open dates (without change to closing date) for standalone documents do not need to come to the TSC. Woody seconds. Motion unanimously approved.

Standing Committee Reports/Approvals

1. CEO Report – none available
2. CTO Report - listserv attachment
   • Ravi asks what is the next steps on the workbench evaluation? Needs some socialization with Vocabulary and Tooling. Harmonization last week had a brief exchange, says Woody, and could be powerful for managing vocabulary changes but needs workflow and forms to be made accessible to ordinary mortals. Is it targeted as a harmonization or maintenance tool? Maintaining terminologies as with RoseTree? Woody notes this is principally looked at as a harmonization process.
   • Woody notes that Andy Stechishin is working with Paul Byron on the Publication XML Overhaul.
3. ArB Report – Charlie notes that Ron should probably give the report as he’s been gone for three weeks. Two items of note – in process of editing ECCF papers and slides on track for 18Dec for first version of SAEAF book, with ongoing coordination now between NCI and Karen technical writer to avoid duplication. FHA team has done SAEAF overview at last meeting and will give full overview in January. NIH hopes FHA will formally nominate SAEAF as project. Nancy Orvis had reservations unknown at this time related to maturity of SAEAF; as did Linda Fischetti, with confusion regarding its services orientation. Ken Buetow planned intent is to put FHA in leadership position, with Jack’s agreement. NCI going full force on caEHR functional profile, ambulatory oncology EHR. Notes that Canada is mapping SAEAF to TOGAF.
   • Ron notes the CTO report identifies tracking of the SAEAF book phase 1 in December.
4. Affiliates Report – Ravi had nothing to report.
5. Domain Experts – Nothing to report.
6. Foundation & Technology – No report this week.
7. Structure & Semantic Design – nothing at this time.
8. Technical & Support Services –nothing at this time.

Discussion topics

Open Issues List

For Review 20091123:

• Document the process of ArB nomination and confirmation (for review 20091123 after Charlie Mead's return), see TSC Tracker #1340 – carry forward to time after ArB can go over it. Charlie had sent John a draft waiting for his comments. If no comments then the ArB will review on 12/3 for TSC review on 12/7. Please send to the TSC list right after the ArB meeting.
• Foster development of Product Strategy (TSC Tracker #1364) – Charlie sent an email to listserv today about finding individuals to work on a product strategy. Woody asks about the original question regarding how to know which normative edition should an implementer use? Charlie notes that a product strategy should address that sort of question. What is a product strategy? Woody says he could find someone to answer the original question, but not sure he’d find volunteers to define the second. Charlie says we need to get our arms around the question, talk to executive committee, members of TSC, capture what their ideas of what a product strategy should be and identify areas of consensus, and identify where the effort would go to gain benefit from. We haven’t really made progress if we can’t define what the product strategy would look like. Need a scoping document that bridges that gap, to editorialize the document not sit down and write it. Charlie notes the editorial aspect could be more explicit as no one individual likely has the resources to define the broader strategy. John notes he has the background to make a first draft, but couldn’t expect anything publishable. Austin notes competing priorities with holidays and balloting material. Woody asks if we should draft a statement minus the socializing in a shorter time? Ron agreed with that. Woody could do something with a quality plan with Austin and likely Ravi. Product strategy not likely. No volunteers on the call. Ron can’t contribute directly but can edit and comment. Helen notes also swamped with day job, but not for lack of interest. John looking for one paragraph to work from, from Charlie McCay. Action Item: Charlie to draft a paragraph, John to build upon it, Ron and Helen to review.
• Marc reported on alpha projects, the ArB meeting last week did not provide time to discuss in depth but touched on how the ArB liaison process is working. With some alpha projects floundering we’ve asked project leads and liaisons to participate on the next EA IP advisory call. We’re looking to get charters and statuses we can show on our wiki page. Don’t have a good idea of concrete progress or actionable issues at this time.
  • Asked about the WGM Weds PM session, Marc noted there was some consideration of using time for focused sessions on each project. If we did not have that session we would need to communicate that soon as committees are scheduling around it. Current concern is progress. Marc can offer some additional suggestions for next Monday’s review e.g. morning announcements rather than the large Weds meeting.Action Item: Marc will send his suggestions.
  • Calvin reports SD struggling with some base requirements and don’t have a lot of progress to report.
  • Charlie suggests we may de-emphasize it and make it an opportunity to provide comments if they want to. Q4 program will not be plenary nature; but broad updates on projects will be in morning announcements.