T3SD ConCall-20080214

Agenda

1. (5 min) Meeting Admin
   1. Roll Call
   2. Accept Agenda
   3. TSC meeting Report
2. Insert Agenda items here
3. (10 min) New Business

Attendees

• Helen Stevens Love (chair)
• Woody Beeler V3-Publishing)
• Bill Braithwaite - ESC
• Jane Curry - Tooling
• Dave Hamill - HL7 HQ/PMO
• Frieda Hall - PSC
• Lloyd McKenzie - Tooling
• June Rosploch - PIC
• Abdul Malik Shakir - Education

Meeting Minutes

• Project Scope Statement Comments:
  • Woody; Publishing feels that it is not reasonable and not reflective of the GOM to require a DSTU for all projects and the requirement to have 2 implementaitons on the Project Scope Statement (PSS) is not reflective of the GOM.
  • Jane: The HDF process indicates that it is required – but shoud the HDF be setting policy, or reflective of policy?
  • Dave: The Project Services Committee (PSC) feels there should be a separate PSS for non-DSTU projects that does not have mandatory implementers. This was not clear in the PSS put to the TSC and under discussion.
  • Woody: Need clear decision making process (is this just the GOM?) – and the PSS should be reflective of the Project Life Cycle. The PSC is responsible for the Project Lifecycle diagram (side discussion about how this is documented in the HDF). …discussion continued at end of call when Frieda had joined…
  • Frieda: The PSC had identified that there would be ‘exceptions’ to the PSS for “Infrastructure Projects”. PSC had intended to list the Infrastructure Projects that would qualify. Infrastructure projects would have a different PSS – just a tweak from the existing PSS.
  • Woody: Feels that list should be examples, not definitive list because there will always be more brought fo4rward.
  • Jane: What about ESC and Tooling projects?
  • Frieda: The proposed PSS is only for projects that will result in “Implementable Standards”. All others would use the existing (tweeked) PSS.
  • Helen: Suggestion that the new PSS should be defined by what projects should use it – rather than by the projects that are excepted from using it.
  • ACTION: Request that the PSC clearly specify the role of the new PSS and how/when it will be implemented.
  • Frieda: Concern over timelines to bring PSS back to this SD when they also need to take it to the TSC.
  • Woody: Concern – is there a rush to bring forward the new PSS? It is not needed now until May because the committees have already used the old one for the next cycle. Woody expressed concern over level of involvement of the TSC rather than this being addressed by the Committee and the SD.
  • ACTION: Frieda to address these concerns with the TSC when she next reports to them.

• GForge Wiki:
  • The SD had requested that the ESC investigate the GForge WIKI and look into strategies to bring the WIKI onto an HL7 server and define it’s use for all committees.
  • Woody reports that tooling (Lloyd) has done a preliminary review of the GForge wiki and found that it lacks core functionality. Tooling will issue a note to that effect.
  • The ESC is looking at a WIKI that is provided as part of the new Microsoft tooling that will be part of the new website. However, they have not had the chance to evaluate it and question the priority versus the new website – when they have limited resources.
  • Woody: Need to make sure that evaluation compares to Media WIKI (sp?) that is being used by Mayo and is rich in functionality.

ESC to continue with this on their work list – SD co-chairs to report progress to TSC as part of regular update.

• US Realm:
  • As requested – Helen raised the question as to if the SD felt they should be engaged in any way regarding the discussion of a US Realm. The SD members felt that this was a Board and TSC item and that they did not need to be specifically engaged.
  • Note that Publishing may be impacted by a decision and should be considered when decisions are made.

• Involvement Task Force
  • Helen provided overview of the ITF and Woody/Frieda provided some history and scope information.
  • It was agreed that this SD is the appropriate SD for this committee.
  • ACTION: Virginia/Mark to bring forward a charter and attend future SD call to review with the rest of the SD.

Return to >> Schedule, Agendas, Decision Practices and Minutes