Difference between revisions of "2012-09-09 TSC WGM Minutes"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with '{{subst::WGM Agenda Template}}') |
m (moved 2012-09-09 TSC WGM Agenda to 2012-09-09 TSC WGM Minutes: minutes approved) |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ | ||
| − | =TSC | + | =TSC Sunday evening meeting for 2012Sept WGM in Baltimore= |
back to [[TSC Minutes and Agendas]] | back to [[TSC Minutes and Agendas]] | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
{|border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" | {|border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" | ||
| width="30%" colspan="2" align="left" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''HL7 TSC Meeting Minutes''' <br/> | | width="30%" colspan="2" align="left" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''HL7 TSC Meeting Minutes''' <br/> | ||
| − | '''Location: | + | '''Location: Annapolis Room |
| − | | width="50%" colspan="1" align="left" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Date: | + | | width="50%" colspan="1" align="left" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Date: 2012-09-09'''<br/> '''Time: Q5 EDT''' |
|- | |- | ||
| width="30%" colspan="2" align="right"|'''Facilitator''': Austin Kreisler | | width="30%" colspan="2" align="right"|'''Facilitator''': Austin Kreisler | ||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
|width="40%"|'''Affiliation''' | |width="40%"|'''Affiliation''' | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |x||Calvin Beebe||HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |x||Woody Beeler||HL7 FTSD Co-Chair |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |x ||Lorraine Constable||invited guest, ArB, co-chair-elect |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |x||Freida Hall||HL7 TSS SD Co-Chair |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |x||Tony Julian||HL7 FTSD Co-Chair |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |x||Austin Kreisler (Chair)||HL7 TSC Chair, Ad-hoc member |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |x||Lynn Laakso (scribe, non-voting)||HL7 HQ |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |x||Patrick Loyd||HL7 T3SD Co-Chair |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |x||Charlie Mead||HL7 ArB Chair |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |x||Ron Parker||HL7 ArB Alternate |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |x||Melva Peters ||Ad-hoc member, co-chair-elect |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |x||Ed Tripp||HL7 DESD Co-Chair |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |x||Pat Van Dyke||HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |x ||Bo Dagnall || ArB |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | | x||Jane Curry || ArB |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
|- | |- | ||
|colspan="3" style="background:#f0f0f0;"| | |colspan="3" style="background:#f0f0f0;"| | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | |colspan="3" |'''Quorum Requirements (Co-chair +5 with 2 SD Reps) Met: ''' | + | |colspan="3" |'''Quorum Requirements (Co-chair +5 with 2 SD Reps) Met: '''yes |
|} | |} | ||
| − | ==Agenda Topics== | + | ==Sunday Agenda Topics== |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | ArB | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
==Supporting Documents== | ==Supporting Documents== | ||
| Line 117: | Line 68: | ||
==Minutes/Conclusions Reached:== | ==Minutes/Conclusions Reached:== | ||
| − | + | Convened at 5:20 PM EDT | |
| − | + | Ron gives a status on what the ArB has in the BAM update for the TSC. ArB worked all three quarters today instantiating the metamodel, to the limit of their scope and needing to accept content into the structure. A scope around methodological execution and the 11 step Erl SOA lifecycle adopted as a life cycle with three state diagrams. One is generic product, one generic product line, one for balloted specification. From the slide on methodology, he adds that methodology defines artifacts as well as the execution of the methodology. The oversight of the execution of methodology is in the management role. Ron reviews the 20120909 BAM Draft2 Spreadsheet. | |
| − | + | *Ed asks about Marketing at product line adoption planning. Ron notes that it's above the line for TSC but can communicate as an expected input. | |
| − | + | *Ed suggests testing their proposed definition against something out of the balloted standards type such as "education" as a product line. Charlie asserts the product line collection would have similar governance/management/methodology (GMM). Ron agrees that ballot specs would have a different lifecycle than other products. | |
| − | + | *Calvin asks about disenfranchising the domain team. It was agreed that the dynamics of interaction with the domain experts would change. | |
| − | + | *Woody points out that the FHIR team acting with the formality of the Product Line team would have bogged down under additional workload and may be too many roles to fill to enable agile development as was used initial with V2 or CDA. The additional roles presented as part of Product line teams may have the same people doing the work. Ron cautions that without more structure it creates lack of coherence as with V3. | |
| − | + | *Calvin adds that roles that are not producing balloted specs as products won't find sufficient volunteer staffing. Ron notes that some roles should not be voluntary. | |
| − | - | + | *Ed reminds the group that each person's definition of the list of products is different and we need a clearly defined set. Discussion ensued on member organizations' willingness to accommodate requests to follow a process of development that includes steps x, y, and z. Generally felt such requests are well received. |
| + | *Expectations of what is needed on steps in banded rows of spreadsheet reviewed - fist two steps of life cycle are new, the others are old hat to the organization. | ||
| + | *Ron notes that publishing occurs in three steps: voting, ballot recon, and external publication of specifications. | ||
| + | *Bo describes the metamodel behind the spreadsheet for who, how, why and what. Discussion ensued. | ||
| + | *Market forces and an analogy to the recording industry described, and participation in HL7 regarded as "pre-competitive analysis" as quoted by Ron of Jane. | ||
| + | *TSC needs to come to consensus on product lines. FHIR might be a V3 line or a separate line that acknowledges its roots in V3. Woody recommends using V3 not as a product line but as a reference, for product lines as CDA, messages, and FHIR. Perhaps Datatypes, RIM, and Vocabulary and perhaps ITS could be called Foundation as a product line. This would require renaming the recently formed V3 Governance Task Force convened to work on Data Types. | ||
| + | *Austin summarizes his intent to report from the TSC that we're beginning work on the product line definition and making progress. | ||
| + | *Discussion continued on the impact of product line organization with respect to Steering Divisions, and the roles within Steering Divisions and relationships between them. | ||
| + | Adjourned 6:52 PM EDT. | ||
{|border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" | {|border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" | ||
Latest revision as of 19:33, 1 October 2012
TSC Sunday evening meeting for 2012Sept WGM in Baltimore
back to TSC Minutes and Agendas
TSC WGM Agenda/Minutes
| HL7 TSC Meeting Minutes Location: Annapolis Room |
Date: 2012-09-09 Time: Q5 EDT | |
| Facilitator: Austin Kreisler | Note taker(s): Lynn Laakso | |
| Attendee | Name | Affiliation |
| x | Calvin Beebe | HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair |
| x | Woody Beeler | HL7 FTSD Co-Chair |
| x | Lorraine Constable | invited guest, ArB, co-chair-elect |
| x | Freida Hall | HL7 TSS SD Co-Chair |
| x | Tony Julian | HL7 FTSD Co-Chair |
| x | Austin Kreisler (Chair) | HL7 TSC Chair, Ad-hoc member |
| x | Lynn Laakso (scribe, non-voting) | HL7 HQ |
| x | Patrick Loyd | HL7 T3SD Co-Chair |
| x | Charlie Mead | HL7 ArB Chair |
| x | Ron Parker | HL7 ArB Alternate |
| x | Melva Peters | Ad-hoc member, co-chair-elect |
| x | Ed Tripp | HL7 DESD Co-Chair |
| x | Pat Van Dyke | HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair |
| x | Bo Dagnall | ArB |
| x | Jane Curry | ArB |
| Quorum Requirements (Co-chair +5 with 2 SD Reps) Met: yes | ||
Sunday Agenda Topics
ArB
Supporting Documents
Minutes/Conclusions Reached:
Convened at 5:20 PM EDT Ron gives a status on what the ArB has in the BAM update for the TSC. ArB worked all three quarters today instantiating the metamodel, to the limit of their scope and needing to accept content into the structure. A scope around methodological execution and the 11 step Erl SOA lifecycle adopted as a life cycle with three state diagrams. One is generic product, one generic product line, one for balloted specification. From the slide on methodology, he adds that methodology defines artifacts as well as the execution of the methodology. The oversight of the execution of methodology is in the management role. Ron reviews the 20120909 BAM Draft2 Spreadsheet.
- Ed asks about Marketing at product line adoption planning. Ron notes that it's above the line for TSC but can communicate as an expected input.
- Ed suggests testing their proposed definition against something out of the balloted standards type such as "education" as a product line. Charlie asserts the product line collection would have similar governance/management/methodology (GMM). Ron agrees that ballot specs would have a different lifecycle than other products.
- Calvin asks about disenfranchising the domain team. It was agreed that the dynamics of interaction with the domain experts would change.
- Woody points out that the FHIR team acting with the formality of the Product Line team would have bogged down under additional workload and may be too many roles to fill to enable agile development as was used initial with V2 or CDA. The additional roles presented as part of Product line teams may have the same people doing the work. Ron cautions that without more structure it creates lack of coherence as with V3.
- Calvin adds that roles that are not producing balloted specs as products won't find sufficient volunteer staffing. Ron notes that some roles should not be voluntary.
- Ed reminds the group that each person's definition of the list of products is different and we need a clearly defined set. Discussion ensued on member organizations' willingness to accommodate requests to follow a process of development that includes steps x, y, and z. Generally felt such requests are well received.
- Expectations of what is needed on steps in banded rows of spreadsheet reviewed - fist two steps of life cycle are new, the others are old hat to the organization.
- Ron notes that publishing occurs in three steps: voting, ballot recon, and external publication of specifications.
- Bo describes the metamodel behind the spreadsheet for who, how, why and what. Discussion ensued.
- Market forces and an analogy to the recording industry described, and participation in HL7 regarded as "pre-competitive analysis" as quoted by Ron of Jane.
- TSC needs to come to consensus on product lines. FHIR might be a V3 line or a separate line that acknowledges its roots in V3. Woody recommends using V3 not as a product line but as a reference, for product lines as CDA, messages, and FHIR. Perhaps Datatypes, RIM, and Vocabulary and perhaps ITS could be called Foundation as a product line. This would require renaming the recently formed V3 Governance Task Force convened to work on Data Types.
- Austin summarizes his intent to report from the TSC that we're beginning work on the product line definition and making progress.
- Discussion continued on the impact of product line organization with respect to Steering Divisions, and the roles within Steering Divisions and relationships between them.
Adjourned 6:52 PM EDT.
Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
|
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items
|
