From HL7 TSC
Jump to navigation Jump to search

TSC - Technical Steering Committee

Monday, July 21st, 2008 11:00 AM (US Eastern Time, GMT -5)
To participate, dial 770-657-9270 and enter pass code 124466#
GoToMeeting at
GoToMeeting ID: 822-618-174 

back to TSC Minutes and Agendas



  • CTO: John Quinn
  • Domain Experts: Jim Case (primary), Austin Kreisler (alternate)
  • Foundation & Technology: Ioana Singureanu (primary), Woody Beeler (alternate)
  • Structure & Semantic Design: Calvin Beebe (primary), Gregg Seppala (alternate)
  • Technical & Support Services: Ken McCaslin (primary), Helen Stevens Love (alternate)
  • Affiliate: Frank Oemig,
  • ARB Chair: Charlie Mead
  • HQ: Karen Van Hentenryck


  • Charles Jaffe (CEO); Ed Hammond (HL7 Chair); Chuck Meyer (HL7 Vice Chair)


  • Ken McCaslin
  • Gregg Seppala
  • Charlie McCay


  1. (5 min) Meeting Admin
    1. Roll Call - Quorum was established with the following individuals participating on the call: John Quinn, Austin Kreisler, Calvin Beebe, John Koisch, Charlie Mead, Chuck Meyer, Woody Beeler, Ioana Singureanu, Frank Oemig, Helen Stevens, and Karen Van Hentenryck
    2. Accept Agenda - The agenda was accepted with the suggestion that the July 28 call be cancelled as several TSC members would be enroute to the Board retreat and unavailable for the call.
    3. Approve Minutes from concall-20080707 - MOTION by Singureanu: To approve minutes; seconded by Beebe. Minutes approved unanimously.
  2. (20 min) Standing Committee Reports/Approvals
    1. CEO Report - No report was provided.
    2. CTO Report - Quinn did not publish a CTO report as he was focused on the Rockefeller meeting in Bellagio, Italy last week. He will report further on the next call. The purpose of the Bellagio meetings was to assist the Rockerfeller Foundation and Wolrd Health Organization with determining how to put ehealth capabilitieis into under developed countries. Representatives for under developed countires were in attendance as were several HL7 members, including Bob Dolin, Bob Greenes, Bill Braithwaite, Becky Kush, and Dennis Giokas.
    3. ARB report - Below is summary from the second of our three JumpStart SOA meetings. The issue of ‘what is an Entity in the RIM and how does it relate to service specifications restricted to Entity semantics’ remains an open (and very much contested issue) and now seems to warrant formal escalation to MnM (for starters):
      • The centerpiece of the week's discussion was conformance and compliance. It, and the follow on discussions of governance, became the biggest supporting points for SOA
      • There was some concern about the NCI-heavy version of what we were doing (from Mead and AMS). Jane and I talked about the Mayo, IBM, Siemens, Accenture, BAH, VA, DoD, and Infoway acknowledgement of what we are doing. We should make this acknowledgement (and in most cases acceptance / alignment) specific and explicit
      • There was a general feeling that the concepts of SOA support the other implementation paradigms. JC pushed the idea that the HDF really needs to yield Service Development Framework, Message Development Framework, Structured Docs Dev FW, and the EHR Functional Profile Development Framework. These would all yield contracts (ISCS's) and support the ideas of conformance and compliance, as well as support governance models.
      • We had a very good conversation about who our customers are (the answer is "anyone interested in building collaborations to support healthcare or the life sciences)")
      • AMS wants to create a uml profile for services that is supported by our conformance model - I started one based on UPMS, but UPMS is lacking in several regards. Still it is a start. The conformance profile has changed slightly, but I believe is very solid (attached).
      • There was also a lot of work on the Dynamic Framework. We agreed that Application Roles are a conceptual level thing that should be included for conformance, but that the CDL definitions are very good in defining the pieces and parts of an application role. There was also some agreement that CDL is mixing and matching layers (PIM v PSM, etc.). Interestingly, the group were pretty opposed to the work to define the v3 ADT specs using the CDL - the HL7 v3 spec contains a lot of spurious analysis and assumptions that probably should not apply.
      • How to report out this information - The ArB needs direction from the TSC and CTO on how the results of these three meetings should be discussed, presented, etc. in September. They would like to devote part of their August meeting to working on the deliverables. Quinn feels that we should have a presentation at the TSC meeting on Monday evening along with a newsletter article between now and the September WGM. Beeler thought we were doing a SOA architecture to see how it would fit into a larger architecture and suggests that this be presented as part of a larger picture. There should also be a discussion with all Work Groups that have an interest in this, including MnM, INM, Vocab, etc. We might ask the SOA, INM, MnM and vocabulary Work Groups to review their joint meeting schedule to see if there is a joint meeting they could devote to this topic. ACTION ITEM: Beeler and Singureanu will coordinate off line with Charlie Mead to determine if/when this meeting of interested parties could convene.
    4. Affiliates Report - Nothing to report.
    5. Domain Experts - The DSTU publication requests were brought forward directly to the TSC as opposed to going through the Steering Divisions. It is not clear whether these request to publish should be brought directly to the TSC or be requested up through the Steering Division. ACTION ITEM: The process will be discussed and determined on the next TSC call.
      • Follow up from item from July 7 call - Domain Experts steering division co-chairs will check on the Clinical Decision Support: Virtual Medical Record, Release document to determine whether the corresponding project scope statement has been approved. Without seeing a project scope statement, it appears that this particular document would overlap with other documents being products by other Work Groups within HL7. - Kreisler was not aware of this action item but Beeler noted that since the document is going out for DSTU vote, it is a moot point.
    6. Foundation & Technology - Nothing to report.
    7. Structure & Semantic Design - Nothing to report.
    8. Technical & Support Services - Nothing to report.
  3. (30 min) Discussion topics
    1. Request from Structured Documents to publish the following two documents as DSTUs:
      • HL7 Implementation Guide for CDA Release 2: History and Physical (H&P) Notes [1] - Oemig noted that there are many implementations that cannot be re-used. These need to be addressed in a global way. Beebe noted this is a noteworthy issue and indicated that these particular documents are constrains on the CCD. He also noted that there is a need for tooling that will help us manage the parts that can be re-used. Everything that comes from the Structured Documents Work Group is a constraint on CDA. Omeig reiterated the meed for a methodology or part of our development framework to address this issue. MOTION passed unanimously.
      • HL7 Implementation Guide for CDA Release 2: Consultation Notes [2] - Unanimously approved.
    2. Request from RCRIM to publish the Regulated Products Submission Standard Release 1 as an informative document [3] - Unanimously approved.
    3. Request from Patrick Lloyd to publish the Ambulatory Care ELINCS implementation guide as an informative document and to register the document with ANSI as a technical report.[4]- Unanimously approved.
    4. Proposed standards naming conventions TSC Issue Tracker Item: 338[5] - Van Hentenryck and Lloyd were asked to draft this document based on current but undocumented naming conventions. ACTION ITEM: The TSC members will send their suggestions to Karen Van Hentenryck. An action item will be added to the next TSC meeting agenda to finalize and adopt this document.
    5. Prioritize the Issues list [6]- Given the time, this item was deferred to the next call.

TSC will NOT convene on July 28

Call adjourned at Noon ET.

Agenda item list (our sand box for future meetings)

Click for TSC Action Item List