Difference between revisions of "Concall-20080519"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Agenda) |
(→Agenda) |
||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
## Domain Experts - | ## Domain Experts - | ||
## Foundation & Technology - | ## Foundation & Technology - | ||
| + | -- | ||
<p> | <p> | ||
The Steering Division approved the [http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/docman/view.php/52/168/DynamicFrameworkRequirements_and_Scope_20080509.doc Project Scope Statement] submitted by the ArB regarding. The SD approved at the call on May 13th. However, the ArB intended to submit the document as a deliverable of an existing project rather than a scope statement for a new project. The document was sent for review on May 14th and the SD was given until May 16th to review the document: [http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/docman/view.php/52/169/Definitions%20and%20Assumptions--DynamicModelFramework.doc Definitions and Assumptions - Dynamic Framework] and to provide feedback. To date, four additional requirements were suggested to the project team for consideration. The SD discussed them on the list.</p><p> | The Steering Division approved the [http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/docman/view.php/52/168/DynamicFrameworkRequirements_and_Scope_20080509.doc Project Scope Statement] submitted by the ArB regarding. The SD approved at the call on May 13th. However, the ArB intended to submit the document as a deliverable of an existing project rather than a scope statement for a new project. The document was sent for review on May 14th and the SD was given until May 16th to review the document: [http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/docman/view.php/52/169/Definitions%20and%20Assumptions--DynamicModelFramework.doc Definitions and Assumptions - Dynamic Framework] and to provide feedback. To date, four additional requirements were suggested to the project team for consideration. The SD discussed them on the list.</p><p> | ||
| Line 45: | Line 46: | ||
* Publish system behavior and receiver responsibilities specifications as a web site (e.g. similar to javadoc) or “book” reports (RTF, PDF, etc.)''</p> | * Publish system behavior and receiver responsibilities specifications as a web site (e.g. similar to javadoc) or “book” reports (RTF, PDF, etc.)''</p> | ||
| − | + | [[User:Ioana13|Ioana13]] 06:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC) | |
## Structure & Semantic Design - | ## Structure & Semantic Design - | ||
Revision as of 06:50, 19 May 2008
TSC - Technical Steering Committee
Monday, May 19th, 2008 11:00 AM (US Eastern Time, GMT -5) To participate, dial 770-657-9270 and enter pass code 124466# GoToMeeting at https://www.gotomeeting.com/join/822618174 GoToMeeting ID: 822-618-174
back to TSC Minutes and Agendas
Contents
Attendance
Expected
- 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
invited
- Charles Jaffe (CEO); Ed Hammond (HL7 Chair); Chuck Meyer (HL7 Vice Chair)
Apologies
- Gregg Seppala (S&SD SD)
- Ioana Singureanu (FT SD)
Agenda
- (5 min) Meeting Admin
- Roll Call -
- Accept Agenda -
- Approve Minutes from meeting-20080503 and meeting-20080504
- (20 min) Standing Committee Reports/Approvals
- CEO Report -
- CTO Report -
- ARB report -
- Affiliates Report -
- Domain Experts -
- Foundation & Technology -
--
The Steering Division approved the Project Scope Statement submitted by the ArB regarding. The SD approved at the call on May 13th. However, the ArB intended to submit the document as a deliverable of an existing project rather than a scope statement for a new project. The document was sent for review on May 14th and the SD was given until May 16th to review the document: Definitions and Assumptions - Dynamic Framework and to provide feedback. To date, four additional requirements were suggested to the project team for consideration. The SD discussed them on the list.
- Provide a deterministic mapping of current HL7-specific behavioral concepts (triggers, application roles, interactions, message wrappers) to standard- based behavioral concepts specified by the new framework.”
- Describe system behavior and receiver responsibilities (e.g. Order Processing, V2 Chapter 2 acknowledgment processing)
- Provide a standard-based, computable representation of the system behaviors and receiver responsibilities (e.g. WSDL, WSDL-CDL, BPEL)
- Publish system behavior and receiver responsibilities specifications as a web site (e.g. similar to javadoc) or “book” reports (RTF, PDF, etc.)
Ioana13 06:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- Structure & Semantic Design -
- Technical & Support Services -
- (30 min) Discussion topics
- Reaffirmation of V2 XML standard -
- Out-of-cycle ballot criteria
