2012-01-16 TSC WGM SDO Activities Minutes

From HL7 TSC
Jump to navigation Jump to search

TSC Monday Q3 Agenda - 2012 Jan WGM San Antonio, TX USA

back to TSC Minutes and Agendas
to JIC Projects page

to ISO_and_JIC_projects wiki page

TSC HL7 activities with other SDOs Meeting

Location: TBD

Date: 2012-01-16
Time: Monday Q2/3
Facilitator Austin Kreisler Note taker(s) Lynn Laakso
Opportunity for HL7 WGM attendees to review activities in collaboration with other SDOs such as IHE, OMG, and the JWG and JIC, and provide comment.

Bron Kisler, Lisa Spellman, Tim Buxton, Austin Kreisler, Lynn Laakso, Christian Hay, Ann Wrightson, Heather Stevens, Lloyd Chumbley, Brad Pedrow, Harry Rhodes
attendance sheet


Welcome and Introduction - Austin Kreisler

  • Continue discussions from Sunday afternoon
  • Plan for next WGM: Streamlining current cross SDO processes - developer/project perspective

Comment period


Convened at 1:47PM

  • Welcome and Introduction - Austin Kreisler
  • Sunday discussion
    • Lisa observes that communication is a good way to avoid many problems that occur though lack of understanding. There's so much going on with all the SDOs it's hard. Austin concurs, noting that Project Scope Statements were a successful way to get our Work Groups thinking about what they're doing. They are now visible outside of HL7, searchable on the internet. Bron adds that most of the stuff we're doing comes down to communication. Austin fears that without better understanding new projects don't seek JIC coordination because it's too much work.
    • Ann would like to understand the value proposition for JIC to apply that within the UK Realm. They would also like to move towards a standards collaborative arrangement. Christian notes that such collaborations are important within a region. Austria has MOUs between all the SDOs to facilitate communication and foster a learning effect. Austin suggests that it sounds like Ann would like to have an 'Activities with SDOs' session like this within their UK SDOs. Ann notes that right now it's all that really messy informal stuff. Bron notes that from a CDISC perspective as an SDO they cannot staff that conversation in each country or realm. That conversation happens in the user groups; Austin notes that may be roughly equivalent to the HL7 Affiliates. Some SDOs have local chapters or affiliates, some don't.
    • Lisa asks about the panel approach; if we have this at each WGM to discuss what is happening in each SDO is very useful. Austin notes that we'll seek a different room to avoid overrun with the International Council. We've also been encouraged to seek a different day of the WGM. Bron notes the verbal reports were not of added value in addition to the written reports. Lynn notes that the return of reports in advance in the meeting was not consistent. Such an update is still of some importance. Bron cautions that the SDOs that are not part of JIC should not be discouraged either. Austin notes that the Connectathon had consumed a lot of attention. With the next cycle's agenda focused on the project and developer perspective, we may see more boots on the ground perspective on the relevance to JIC. Lisa agrees that projects in the pipeline would be good to hear from. Austin suggests that OMG/HL7 HSSP work would be a good example.
    • Ann adds that HL7 UK and IHE UK have their own MOUs, and understanding of what it meant to be IHE Europe. Understanding that comes down from the top with a coherent theory can help evolve a coherent practice. Austin adds that there is trouble with those in IHE that don't consider themselves an SDO, at least not all the time. We need to build on the person-to-person relationships to formalize the organization to organization level relationships.
    • Lisa asks if the business plan discussions include work towards strategic relationships with other organizations. Austin agrees that such discussions are taking place but no further details can be discussed. There is a drawback that the TSC sponsors this session and not the Board-appointed ORC. ORC has the formal responsibility for managing the MOU relationships with other organizations.
  • Plan for next WGM
    • Panel of people who are working on projects that are cross-SDOs, to include JIC projects as well as HSSP projects like CTS2 for example. Ken Rubin or Russ Hamm could talk about CTS2, Grahame Grieve on ISO Datatypes. Ann suggests we pursue members to discuss what Datatypes means for ISO 21090 and what does that mean for HL7? Austin is trying to encompass other SDOs other than JIC. What about HL7/ISO projects, and intent for JIC to replace the bilateral agreements between the individual SDOs? Bron notes that there are projects that are not appropriate for JIC that are still relationships where certain projects are still appropriate. Austin notes that we still need a good grip on what kind of projects should be part of the JIC and what should not. Christian adds that when you have more than two SDOs involved then JIC makes sense. A JIC project without ISO does not make sense. The goal of advancing standards to ISO is part of the JIC charter. Fitting the supply chain elements with the patient care elements is the goal of JIC participation with the patient identification project with GS1.
    • Austin asks how the TSC might evaluate projects that come forward as being appropriate for JIC. We don't want to send every project to JIC to see what's of interest. GS1 members might not understand what is of interest to CDISC. Brad suggests that you come up with some broad categories where people can register their projects and self-identify their eligibility for consideration. Austin notes that HL7 has a process for categorizing projects for our own use. Austin suggests a first step might be publishing our HL7 projects to the SDO Activities list, and encourage others to cross-publish on that list. Bron feels the cross connections would be useful either for individuals to get involved. Christian adds that GS1 has 250 working groups and so some filtering must be done. He notes that ISO must publish like a machine gun every day! He prefers we work on medium to long term goals; he and Brad try to make people familiar with GS1 at the HL7 Working Group meeting and hope that if their efforts strike a chord they will hear something back. It is different for CDISC for a niche target that already has a strong relationship within an HL7 working group.
    • Brad asks about the appetite for this, and interest or competition with others. Bron describes the base intent to collaborate with HL7 and CDISC to avoid duplication. Ann notes that CEN was more competitive with HL7 in the past but has faded and there is more talk of harmonization. RIM and 32606 may someday be recognized as different viewpoints on the same problem. Brad notes that something like the SCO is aided by government recognition.
    • Bron adds that the JIC is grappling with IP. Different IP policies between the SDOs are an issue. CDISC IP is open and free but once it goes into HL7 or ISO it's likely to change. Lloyd adds from the Acord organization which is an SDO in the property and casualty space. They often won't collaborate with other organizations unless they are an SDO. Ann notes that in HL7 the draft material is available but the published standards need membership or purchase. ISO is different. The HSSP relationship has different IP rules based on which organization is responsible for that step in the process.
    • Lisa stresses that people in the SDOs understand the importance of collaboration; we can't solve all the problems today but we can move forward towards the goal. We need to do more marketing of this session.
    • Austin asks about moving it into the week. Another way to do it is just once a year at the plenary. There are so many conflicts with Working Groups scheduled during the week. Christian finds the interaction more interesting to have it more than once a year. Lisa suggests a working lunch. The International Council is growing and more representatives are there to speak and they're interested in claiming Q4 for their meeting. A lunch session would allow the panelists to present while attendees eat. Another alternative is a breakfast session. Ann suggests we emulate the International Council with their luncheon and then have the opportunity to spill over into the next quarter. Perhaps Monday lunch would be free. Further scheduling discussion ensued. It was encouraging that after the afternoon break on Sunday that additional people were coming in to the International Affiliate meeting specifically for our Activities with SDOs meeting. Lisa suggests that international attendees interested in the broader arena and is there some part of their discussion that might fall into the SDO arena. Bron adds that many of the ISO member delegees are also affiliate chairs or vice versa and would be interested. Austin recaps that we'll still plan for Sunday Q4 and move this followup session to a Monday lunch. Attendees can be encouraged to attend during the Monday general session.
    • Austin asks about logistics; how often do we want to have calls? Should we start with a monthly call, and can schedule others as we get closer? Bron suggests one call in March at which we schedule a couple more in April. Austin suggests we'll send out a Doodle poll for a meeting in March and then pick up the pace from there.

Adjourned 2:59 PM CST.