2010-12-20 TSC Call Minutes

From HL7 TSC
(Redirected from 2010-12-20 TSC Call Agenda)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

TSC Agenda/Minutes

Meeting Info/Attendees

HL7 TSC Meeting Minutes

Location: Dial 770-657-9270 and enter pass code 124466#

Date: 2010-12-20
Time: 11 am EST
Facilitator: Austin Kreisler Note taker(s): Lynn Laakso
Attendee Name Affiliation
regrets Calvin Beebe HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair
x Woody Beeler HL7 FTSD Co-Chair
x Bob Dolin HL7 Board Chair
x Tony Julian invited guest, HL7 FTSD
x Austin Kreisler HL7 TSC Chair, DESD Co-Chair
x Lynn Laakso HL7 staff support
x Patrick Loyd invited guest, HL7 T3SD
x Ken McCaslin HL7 TSS SD Co-Chair
regrets Charlie Mead HL7 ArB Chair
x Ravi Natarajan HL7 Affiliate Representative
Ron Parker HL7 ArB Alternate
x John Quinn HL7 CTO
x Gregg Seppala HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair
Helen Stevens HL7 TSS SD Co-Chair
x Ed Tripp HL7 DESD Co-Chair
x D. Mead Walker HL7 FTSD Co-Chair
Jay Zimmerman Ad-Hoc member


Quorum Requirements (Chair +5 with 2 SD Reps) Met: yes

Agenda

Agenda Topics
(Lynn needs to re-add the GTM link to the agenda)

  1. Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests)
  2. Agenda review and approval - Austin Kreisler
  3. Approve Minutes of 2010-12-13_TSC Call Agenda
  4. Review action items – Status updates
  5. HL7 Chair Report – Bob Dolin
    • Incubator project
  6. CTO Report - John Quinn
  7. ArB Report – Charlie Mead submitted this report:
    1. The ArB didn’t meet last Thursday so we don’t have a report.
    2. As I’m sure John Quinn will report today, Thomas Erl did agree to write a critique on the portion of the PCAST report dealing with SOA mis-statements. He will submit his report – which I’ve seen and which is excellent – to John to become part of the larger HL7 response to the PCAST report.
  8. Affiliates Report – Ravi Natarajan/Jay Zimmerman
  9. Domain Experts Report– Austin Kreisler/Ed Tripp
  10. Foundation & Technology Report– Woody Beeler/Mead Walker
  11. Structure & Semantic Design Report– Calvin Beebe/Gregg Seppala
  12. Technical & Support Services Report- Ken McCaslin/Helen Stevens
    • what action should be taken regarding an FAQ that is being debated by MnM. The FAQ’s focus is in regards to whether a Project Facilitator should specify a RIM version when a project is developing a V3 standard (see TSC Tracker #1737)
  13. WGM Planning - agenda setting for January and May WGM
    • Working Group preparations - agendas
  14. Organizational Relations Committee update (semiweekly) - Helen Stevens
  15. Discussion Topics:
    • TSC SWOT - review
    • TSC Decision Making Practices - draft based on new template
    • Open Issues List
      Austin is reviewing outstanding issues - those assigned to Charlie will be assigned to Austin, need to determine next steps
      • Foster development of Product Strategy (#1364) – Product Quality spun off into its own project. Product & Services Strategy project scope is outstanding task item assigned to Ken.
      • HL7 Security Considerations – Cookbook (#1513) – [see also introducing new processes to HL7 at # 1681], what is the consensus mechanism by which this has been approved for use as an Education tutorial?
      • Healthcare Readiness Project Development (#1636) – updated scope circulated to Government projects list
      • Neutral Mapping Notation (#1600) – sent followup inquiry to ITS and received response that WG would likely approve a revised scope statement at the January WGM.
      • How to proceed with NCPDP’s request for mapping to the RIM (#1647) – John Quinn to create a proposal for John Klimek to do the NCPDP mapping.
      • Explore maintaining usage statistics for V3 (pending response by Marketing) # 1661 – extended request to Marketing to accept ownership of the issue but have had no response.
      • Introducing new processes to HL7 (# 1681) – description of “process adoption” process, e.g. alpha vs endorsed vs. encouraged vs mandated i.e. Security Risk Framework Cookbook

Supporting Documents

Minutes

Minutes/Conclusions Reached:
(Lynn needs to re-add the GTM link to the agenda)

  1. Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests) none joined the call
  2. Agenda review and approval - Austin Kreisler
    • Austin adds that he’s had a family medical emergency that may jeopardize his attendance in Sydney. He won’t know for sure for a while but Domain Experts would be without representation. Jay’s transition from ad-hoc to Affiliate representative opens up an ad-hoc position. Gregg reports Jay does not have the funding to go; Patrick affirms. Ravi does not have confidence that he will be able to go either, though his candidacy for the open Affiliate position was well received by his management. Austin will work with Ed to identify a potential ad-hoc to represent Domain Experts. Ken takes an action item to contact Richard Dixon-Hughes to check on the availability of a Skype phone.
    • Agenda approved.
  3. Approve Minutes of 2010-12-13_TSC Call Agenda approved unanimously.
  4. Review action items – Status updates
    • T3F Strategic Initiative Review update - Woody (Tracker 1581). No progress to report; did not get the PSS drafted. Will address in Sydney.
    • Product and Services Strategy update - Ken (Tracker 1579). No progress to report. Will address in Sydney.
  5. HL7 Chair Report – Bob Dolin
    • Incubator project discussion to be continued under Discussion and in Sydney
  6. CTO Report - John Quinn
    • PCAST report rebuttal on SOA insufficient for healthcare. Discussion in ArB and SOA group. Thomas Erl, Charlie Mead and John had conference call Friday afternoon to discuss comments HL7 can include in a report. Galen and HSSP also discussed confusion between SOA and interoperability.
  7. ArB Report – Charlie Mead submitted this report:
    1. The ArB didn’t meet last Thursday so we don’t have a report.
    2. As I’m sure John Quinn will report today, Thomas Erl did agree to write a critique on the portion of the PCAST report dealing with SOA mis-statements. He will submit his report – which I’ve seen and which is excellent – to John to become part of the larger HL7 response to the PCAST report.
  8. Affiliates Report – Ravi Natarajan has no report. He’s writing an update at the moment; this is his last week for the TSC – he thanks the TSC for the opportunity to serve. He’ll be working with Jay behind the scenes to ensure transition and progress on the TSC Communications Strategy project.
  9. Domain Experts Report–Ed Tripp – nothing until after the first of the year with outstanding votes scheduled to close end of December.
  10. Foundation & Technology Report– Woody Beeler – primary agenda topic was planning for Sydney. Also discussed how better to engage work groups within their Steering Division, such as a SD orientation for new co-chairs joining the SD.
  11. Structure & Semantic Design Report–Gregg Seppala noted they have not met – they have 5 or 6 items for a meeting on Wednesday this week.
  12. Technical & Support Services Report- Ken McCaslin
    • what action should be taken regarding an FAQ that is being debated by MnM. The FAQ’s focus is in regards to whether a Project Facilitator should specify a RIM version when a project is developing a V3 standard (see TSC Tracker #1737)
      • PSC trying to close out issues regarding the PSS. Two camps regarding adding to the FAQ a suggestion on specifying the RIM version with a project, would like TSC guidance. As with Datatypes R2, Woody notes that the same question exists now that we have multiple versions of Datatypes that should it be indicated in the PSS. He suggests that they might indicate whether they are using a version that is not the current version (an ‘old’ version). SPL project members do not want to upgrade from Datatype R1, for example. New standards have no objection but RCRIM notes that it would be a huge cost to the FDA community to change Datatypes to R2 in the next release of SPL. Woody notes that Publishing and the ballot information will be more complicated with the multiple releases in it. Ken summarizes that the default is the current version unless otherwise specified. Woody notes it could be a checkbox that specified if they are using the current ‘infrastructure’ (not just RIM).
      • MOTION: moved by Ken, seconded by Woody, the FAQ will read that unless otherwise specified it will assume the current version of infrastructure (RIM, Datatypes and Vocabulary).
      • This includes V2 version as well.
  13. Vote: unanimously approved.
  14. WGM Planning - agenda setting for January and May WGM
    • Working Group preparations - agendas
    • Agenda: Q1 named Strategic Initiatives and HL7 Strategic Issues; SI issues on the agenda to review the ballot comments (not actually do reconciliation), and planning socializing with TSC. Bob’s not sure if Virginia is available for Saturday morning. Austin suggests we move Quality plan to Q4 with ArB and Tooling.
      • By the way, Quality Plan conference call for today is cancelled.
      • Ravi asks what the attendee count is – Lynn says 150; Ken confirms 149.
  15. Discussion Topics:
    • TSC SWOT - review
      • Austin noted Threats based on PCAST document, with Profiler/Enforcer Organizations (PEOs) appropriation of HL7 IP and creating their own standards. Woody suggests more generally, ‘misappropriation’ of HL7 IP. John suggests ‘unlicensed use’. The group also agrees on “PEOs creating their own healthcare interoperability standards” suggested in place of “rolling their own”.
      • Motion: Ken moves to approve SWOT, seconded by Woody. Vote: unanimously approved.
    • Revisit Incubator project topic: what’s the best way to proceed to ensure the standard developed is the best it can be. How to ensure it’s implementable once we’ve produced it. Bob notes some guidance principles were developed. Project with parallel prototyping and acceleration activities needs some testing, that would be defined in this draft program.
      • Woody notes the idea has merit and also precedent though informal. What are we trying to formalize? Bob notes that Charlie Mead asked where NCI would come in, using such a program, to accelerate the development of CDA R3. Tony notes that in the past it was developed outside HL7 and then brought to HL7 to ratify it (like CCOW).
      • Bob notes that perhaps a better word is an acceleration program rather than incubator, to bring the time frame down from 18-24 months to something more quickly usable. They want to work through the normal HL7 governance process but still accelerate the process. How does a group come in and provide additional support without subverting the typical governance process.
      • Woody thought that it sounded last week it would be sequential rather than parallel.
      • By putting it in writing they can offer a sanctioned approach to NCI, but some volunteers were offended. The guiding principles allow external groups come in to accelerate but ease the fears of the volunteers thinking that NCI would come in and overwhelm with their requirements. Bob would need to get Charlie Mead to agree to share that document with the TSC which we could discuss in Sydney.
    • TSC Decision Making Practices - draft based on new template – will be on Q2 agenda in Sydney.


Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
  • Ken takes an action item to contact Richard Dixon-Hughes to check on the availability of a Skype phone
  • Bob will ask Charlie Mead to agree to share that guidance document with the TSC which we could discuss in Sydney
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items
  • No conference call on 12/27. Next meeting 2011-01-08 in Sydney
Retrieved from "https://tscwiki.hl7.org/w/index.php?title=2010-12-20_TSC_Call_Minutes&oldid=7379"