2011-04-25 TSC Call Minutes

TSC Agenda/Minutes

Meeting Info/Attendees

HL7 TSC Meeting Minutes Location: call 770-657-9270 using code 124466# GoToMeeting ID: 165-215-206		Date: 2011-04-25 Time: 11:00 AM U.S. Eastern
Facilitator: Austin Kreisler		Note taker(s): Lynn Laakso

Attendee	Name	Affiliation
	Calvin Beebe	HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair
x	Woody Beeler	HL7 FTSD Co-Chair
x	Bob Dolin	HL7 Board Chair
x	Tony Julian	HL7 FTSD Co-Chair
x	Austin Kreisler	HL7 TSC Chair, DESD Co-Chair
x	Lynn Laakso	HL7 staff support
x	Patrick Loyd	HL7 T3SD Co-Chair
x	Ken McCaslin	HL7 T3SD Co-Chair
regrets	Charlie Mead	HL7 ArB Chair
	Ravi Natarajan	HL7 Affiliate Representative
	Ron Parker	HL7 ArB Alternate
x	John Quinn	HL7 CTO
x	Gregg Seppala	HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair
x	Ed Tripp	HL7 DESD Co-Chair
	Jay Zimmerman	HL7 Affiliate Representative
x	Dave Hamill	HL7 PMO, HQ staff, invited guest
x	Jim Case	HL7 Vocab WG chair, invited guest
x	Rob Hausam	HL7 Vocab WG chair, invited guest
x	Brian Pech	observer

Quorum Requirements (Chair +5 with 2 SD Reps) Met: yes

Agenda

Agenda Topics

1. Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests)
2. Agenda review and approval - Austin Kreisler
3. Approve Minutes of 2011-04-18_TSC_Call_Agenda
4. Review action items –
5. Approval items:
   • Motion: Approve DSTU Publication Request for HL7 Version 3 Standard: Clinical Trial Registration and Results (CTR&R), Release 1: for RCRIM of DESD, at Project Insight ID# 372, and TSC Tracker # 1900
   • Motion: Approve request to approve Use of SNOMED CT in HL7, by Vocab of FTSD, at TSC Tracker # 1901.
6. Discussion topics:
   • Review suggestions and comments on PBS Metrics Reports - Dave Hamill
     • The most recent version of the report is at http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/frsrelease/775/8248/PBS_Metrics_20110421.xls.
   • Innovations session at the 2011May WGM
   • TSC member on Board Nominations committee
   • TSC Nominations period opened early; closes June 15th
7. Reports: (attach written reports below from Steering Divisions et al.)
   • WGM Planning - current registration 225
8. Open Issues List

Supporting Documents

• See links

Minutes

Minutes/Conclusions Reached:

1. Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests); Brian Pech, observer; Jim Case and Rob Hausam Vocabulary co-chair; Dave Hamill for PBS
2. Agenda review and approval - Austin Kreisler
   • Ken would like to add conversation on contract popup during balloting; ‘International Specifications License agreement’.
3. Approve Minutes of 2011-04-18_TSC_Call_Agenda; SSD and T3SD, John Quinn abstains. Approval passes 2/0/3.
   • Ken corrects his attendance entry to T3SD instead of TSS SD
4. Approval items:
   • Motion: Approve DSTU Publication Request for HL7 Version 3 Standard: Clinical Trial Registration and Results (CTR&R), Release 1: for RCRIM of DESD, at Project Insight ID# 372, and TSC Tracker # 1900
   • Request timeframe only 12 months – when is next round of normative balloting expected? Subsequent release is expected, work is already in progress going forward. The update will deal with posting results related to the initial release message to register the trial.
   • Vote: unanimously approved.
   • Motion: Approve request to approve Use of SNOMED CT in HL7, by Vocab of FTSD, at TSC Tracker # 1901.
   • Jim notes that non-member IHTSDO countries had no compelling reason to move towards SNOMED CT value sets or subsets; IHTSDO now allows codes and descriptions to be used without subscription but those codes must be specifically approved for use in an artifact. In order for HL7 to use SNOMED codes in their documentation and transactions we must request to IHTSDO what we want to do and why we want to do it. This is a template to move through the approval process to go from the Board to IHTSDO to take the first step at using SNOMED in HL7 artifacts. Woody adds that we need to cite certain concept IDs in the body of the standard and that is part of the specification standard for our members. This makes it clear to obtain the rights to publish those concept ids in our vocabulary tables or existing artifacts that may have SNOMED content in them.
   • Patrick asks what is this ‘thing’, and why is the TSC addressing it. He wouldn’t have expected the TSC to discuss this but have it written into the MOU with IHTSDO. Woody notes that this would exist outside of the MOU as a request for their intellectual property. Bob notes that as an official request from the Board to IHTSDO, they wanted to bring this through the Steering Divisions and the TSC so that it would have circulation and opportunity for comment by the membership prior to being considered by the Board. Bob notes that the MOU is deliberately written to be broad so that we don’t have to go back to it for specific requests. Woody also notes that as the request comes directly from the Vocab work group that it has no direct path to the Board so it is following this request path. If the Board had questions they would refer them back to the TSC any way. Austin asks if there are changes proposed to the management of our vocabulary based upon this. Jim says this is the first step to include them as an external vocabulary. At this time it currently makes no change to current processes other than to reference SNOMED as an external vocabulary.
   • Austin is concerned that neither of the affiliate representatives are on the call. Woody says we’re only asking for the provision to publish something in the future. Austin notes that the main discussion that got started on the cochairs list was started by an international member. Jim did try to assuage any concerns that SNOMED would be forced upon anyone or create wholesale changes. It is just to allow us to use the terminology if and when we move forward. The time urgency is to get this through to the IHTSDO by May 24th. Austin asks if we’d be able to move this forward in time if we postpone it to next week. Woody says there’s no reason to wait. Ken asks about existing documents – Jim notes that they would be grandfathered in, it is only to request permission to use the codes. They don’t want to have such specifics in the request. There’s no need to go back and retroactively request use of the standards.
   • Vote: T3SD abstains, passes 4/0/1. Lynn will send the latest copy to Bob.
5. Discussion topics:
   • Review suggestions and comments on PBS Metrics Reports - Dave Hamill
     • The most recent version of the report is at http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/frsrelease/775/8248/PBS_Metrics_20110421.xls.
     • Austin asks for the Report card tab to include the current # of active projects for the WG. Dave agrees.
     • Ed’s concerns that the fewer projects that a Work Group is running, the better they look. We want to be careful that the message that we’re sending is not punitive. Dave noted that the metric as a percentage of projects having infraction was removed, but could be put back in. The bigger work groups are making great progress but it isn’t shown how much work they’re doing. Austin notes that we want Work Groups to work within their capacity. Dave and Lynn have noticed work already being done that improves the reflection on this report and appreciate your efforts. Don is working on changes on the web sites on expired DSTUs and creating new pages and reports for the hl7.org web site as well. The target is the May WGM but will have to see how the ballot cycle goes.
     • MnM also has started to take some actions. Woody notes there are categories where items are still appearing in multiple columns. Core Principles is listed as both non-advancing and unpublished. For ballot items they should not appear in multiple categories. This is similar for idle ballots. Need to know what the precipitating factor is to address that course of action.
     • Austin notes that the report has warts, but has value as well and is useful to the work groups. Is the Report suitable to endorse, with a plan to work on overlaps in ballot statuses, and plan to move forward with publishing more broadly. There was no objection.
     • Woody notes that the Summary Report tab is missing some elements that were there last week.
   • Innovations session at the 2011May WGM
     • Ed and Austin are concerned that despite their efforts to publicize the Innovations effort and no one has advanced a new concept. We have two quarters reserved on Monday but there is no further interest or activity. We can continue to try to promote it but the concept may simply not be catching on. How much bandwidth do we want to put on this to promote it, Austin asks. Patrick agrees that it’s not moving forward. Woody notes that the interest in new ideas exists but the Innovations group work isn’t bringing those out. Austin thinks it’s time to ramp down this current effort. Ed asks how we ramp it down? Cancel the session at the WGM, put a notification on wiki page. Woody says we should cancel the session for the coming WGM and not reschedule it going forward. Ed will work on a motion for the TSC to consider next week.
   • TSC member on Board Nominations committee
     • TSC can place up to two people on the Board nominations committee. No volunteers came forward. If you’re on the Board nominations committee, you can’t run for a Board position.
   • TSC Nominations period opened early; closes June 15th
     • TSC will form our nomination committee for that process also, composed of those members not running for re-election. Complicating factor is that Gregg will not be continuing after the WGM. That Steering Division will have to appoint a replacement for Gregg until an election is conducted. That SD will be electing two co-chairs, one for one year remaining on Gregg’s term and the other for two years starting with January 2012 at the end of Calvin’s term. Motion: Ken moves and Woody seconds that we have an election for SSD SD for Gregg’s position following a standard election process at the same time as the regular election. Vote: Unanimously approved. Austin will send out an email to those co-chairs not up for election this year and plan for the nominations committee.
   • contract popup during balloting; ‘International Specifications License agreement’
     • In the agreement 2.1 it suggests that contract employees not full time employees of Quest Diagnostics that Quest cannot share with them the IP. These contract employees are doing work on their behalf but the license agreement would imply that they have to buy their own license. John says this needs to go to Chuck and Bob. The sublicense agreement also requires that they verify that the sublicensee have a valid HL7 license. They don’t want to be on the hook for validating that the physicians with whom they sublicense have vendors who have valid HL7 memberships. Ken feels that you’re obligating non-officers of the company to validate and authorize those agreements. Tony notes that you have to sign that agreement every time you download a document and get an email as well. Woody notes that if it’s interfering with our process we need to take a stronger position. John notes that we won’t sweep it under the covers but we need to take this to a different venue. Ken feels they should be able to sign it once for your membership and have it cover all material downloaded not for every ballot or every download. Austin will follow up with Chuck and Bob and John.
6. Reports: (attach written reports below from Steering Divisions et al.)
   • WGM Planning - current registration 225

Adjourned 12:01PM EDT.

Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date) Lynn will send the latest copy of the SNOMED request to Bob. Ed will work on a motion for the TSC to consider next week to ramp down the Innovations project. Austin will follow up on contract popup during balloting; ‘International Specifications License agreement’ with Chuck and Bob and John.

Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items See 2011-05-02_TSC_Call_Agenda