2012-08-20 TSC Call Minutes

TSC Agenda/Minutes

Meeting Info/Attendees

HL7 TSC Meeting Minutes Location: call 770-657-9270 using code 985371# GoToMeeting ID: 165-215-206		Date: 2012-08-20 Time: 11:00 AM U.S. Eastern
Facilitator: Austin Kreisler		Note taker(s): Lynn Laakso

Quorum = chair + 5 including 2 SD represented				yes
Chair/CTO		ArB		International Affiliate Rep		Ad-Hoc
x	Austin Kreisler	x	Charlie Mead	x	Ravi Natarajan	.
x	John Quinn	x	Ron Parker	regrets	Giorgio Cangioli
Domain Experts		Foundation and Technology		Structure and Semantic Design		Technical and Support Services
x	Ed Tripp	x	Woody Beeler	regrets	Calvin Beebe	x	Freida Hall
x	Mead Walker	x	Tony Julian	x	Pat van Dyke	.	Patrick Loyd
ex officio		Invited Guests		Observers		HL7 Staff
.	Don Mon (HL7 Chair) w/vote	x	Andy Stechishin	x	Hugh Glover	x	Lynn Laakso
x	Bob Dolin (HL7 Vice Chair) vote	x	Melva Peters	x	Paul Knapp	x	Dave Hamill
.	Chuck Jaffe (CEO) vote	x	Jane Curry	x	Crystal Allard, FDA	.
.	x	x	Lloyd McKenzie	x	John Lawrence Reid Technology	.
.		.		x	Brian Pech,	.
.		.		x	Randy Levin	.
.		.		x	Julie James	.
.		.		x	Lonnie Smith	.
.		.		x	Gunther Schadow	.

Agenda

Housekeeping

1. Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests)
2. Agenda review and approval - Austin Kreisler
3. Approve Minutes of 2012-08-13 TSC Call Agenda

Governance

1. Approval items:
2. Discussion topics:
   • V3 R2 Datatypes backwards compatibility - see email from Austin on 'Datatypes R2B discussion paper' by Lloyd McKenzie

Management

1. Review action items –
2. Approval items: (this week's e-vote)
   • Final approval of Business Architecture model projects: send to e-vote
     • ArB HL7 Business Architecture Model (HL7 BAM) at TSC Tracker # 2326
     • Project approval for TSC Governance System for HL7 Business Architecture at TSC Tracker # 2327
     • Project Scope update for HL7 Architecture Program (HL7 AP) formerly the SAIF Architecture Program at Project Insight #751, and TSC Tracker # 2325
   • Project Scope Statement for HL7 Tooling Challenge, at Project Insight # 913 and TSC Tracker # 2336 for Tooling WG of T3SD.
   • Request one week delay in opening of Personal Health Record System Functional Model Release 1 Normative Ballot. This ballot was scheduled to open last Friday 8/17 and remain open through 9/16/2012. We are still completing the documentation and would like approval to defer another week---with the opening being on 8/24 and closing on 9/23. (Pat)
3. Discussion topics:
   • (10 Minutes) Project Services has recommendations on the Project Scope Statement updates. TSC to review the list of items that were pending for the 2013 Project Scope Statement template (in attached) to determine if any items need to be pulled in for the PSS interim release, which will now cover the remainder of 2012 and 2013
4. Reports: (attach written reports below from Steering Divisions et al.)

Supporting Documents

• See links

Minutes

Minutes/Conclusions Reached:

Housekeeping

1. Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests) Austin recounts voting terms for the benefit of the many guests and observers.
2. Agenda review and approval - Austin Kreisler - approved by general consent
3. Approve Minutes of 2012-08-13 TSC Call Agenda. Ravi abstains. Passes 6/0/1

Governance

1. Approval items:
2. Discussion topics:
   • V3 R2 Datatypes backwards compatibility - see email from Austin on 'Datatypes R2B discussion paper' by Lloyd McKenzie
     • Austin introduces the document and asks Lloyd to review. Lloyd notes delta between R1 and R2 datatypes is found by some to be too large and has received requests to publish V3 using R2b, a more backwards-compatible version of datatypes. Background, challenges, and options were discussed.
     • Gunther is invited to add his comments. SPL, ICSR, other implementations cited as a concern for being forced into major changes without adding benefit to the existing implementations. He pleads leniency to permit multiple wire formats and allow these implementers to support the publishing and tooling work that would be needed to support them.
     • Bob Dolin adds that there is concern with creating a fork in V3 whereby committees have to decide which version they will use in standards development. He calls for a Datatypes R3 planned for next year which is a convergence of these.
     • Lloyd notes that the two are fundamentally different and such integration is an unlikely solution. Migration to ISO datatypes was a conscious decision to move away from the prior approach and suffer a significant change in wire syntax.
     • Austin asks ITS folks to discuss current state of R2B. Paul responds that R2B document was created and while intended to ballot normative it was balloted as informative. 4 negative comments remain and reconciliation has been postponed while they explore these other options. ITS is committed to going into the 2012Sept WGM with updated document and reconciliation in readiness for normative ballot in January should that be so desired. R2 introduces breaking change, whether the decision is made now or in the spring to accept breaking change or not.
     • Gunther responds to Lloyd's assertion in objective correctness in R2 datatypes that cannot be reconciled further, that HL7 must come together as an organization and a fork in the datatypes represents a fork in the organization and that damage must also be healed.
     • Woody agrees there is a breaking change in process, and believes it represents a fundamental issue in V3 methodology but the change represents a consensus towards that change.
     • Austin clarifies that both R2 and R2B are based on Abstract Datatypes R2 - we're not backing away from Abstract Datatypes R2.
     • Lloyd adds that a transform was also suggested. Such a transform needs to be generated on a per-interaction basis, such as a per-CDA transaction basis. Transform would be needed that produces transforms per schema. Austin adds it would be a transform generator, which would get ugly really fast.
     • Mead notes that without paying much attention to evolution of DT R2 but works with people implementing V3 using DT R1, as are represented today as implementers from the U.S. Other implementers around the world have standardized on particular versions of the RIM and certain datatypes. Supporting production implementations in V3 is important.
     • Randy Levin speaks from the FDA and from all their regulated companies who receive their requirements to implement V3. This change in DT is disturbing in lack of backwards compatibility for their implementations.
     • Ed notes a comment he's heard is not everyone that votes on the ballot is technically up to speed and would like to see the TSC adopt a process to get involved on important technical issues going to ballot. ACTION ITEM: Lynn will record the request for future discussion.
     • Ravi notes the options have not listed all the pros and cons for affiliate consideration and the document should be extended. With the affiliate expertise in implementing ISO datatypes they need more information to describe why HL7 would back off.
     • Ron echoes Ravi's comments and notes that the bifurcation has a lot more risk than making the change, and if we agree to land in a certain place and adoption of a position regarding wire format compatibility; recognizing that for certain business reasons and have some measure of validation, that at a certain point in future to anticipate the substantive change so organizations can plan for the substantive change. It has to occur over time and have a methodology, or release strategy, and explicit support for those making the change. What is our capacity to support that kind of approach?
     • Woody notes we don't have bandwidth or wit to address as the TSC in this timeframe. He would support R2B save for HL7's leadership position in development of the ISO datatypes. We need to figure out what our message is.
     • Austin recaps at the end of the discussion time permitted. If we wish to address changes to the document we'll need a task force. TSC will discuss by email this week and put on next week's agenda for next steps. Austin thanks those that joined for this item.

Management

1. Review action items –
2. Approval items: (this week's e-vote)
   • Final approval of Business Architecture model projects: send to e-vote
     • ArB HL7 Business Architecture Model (HL7 BAM) at TSC Tracker # 2326
     • Project approval for TSC Governance System for HL7 Business Architecture at TSC Tracker # 2327
     • Project Scope update for HL7 Architecture Program (HL7 AP) formerly the SAIF Architecture Program at Project Insight #751, and TSC Tracker # 2325
   • Project Scope Statement for HL7 Tooling Challenge, at Project Insight # 913 and TSC Tracker # 2336 for Tooling WG of T3SD.
3. Request one week delay in opening of Personal Health Record System Functional Model Release 1 Normative Ballot. This ballot was scheduled to open last Friday 8/17 and remain open through 9/16/2012. We are still completing the documentation and would like approval to defer another week---with the opening being on 8/24 and closing on 9/23. (Pat)
   • Woody asks if there's a reason to agree on an exact date but to defer to the work group to provide the material and give 30 days to open? Motion: Woody moves to allow the Work Group to ballot once they are ready. Mead seconds. Publishing must be kept in the loop, but this publishes outside the V3 area. Vote: unanimously approved.
4. Discussion topics:
   • (10 Minutes) Project Services has recommendations on the Project Scope Statement updates. TSC to review the list of items that were pending for the 2013 Project Scope Statement template (in attached) to determine if any items need to be pulled in for the PSS interim release, which will now cover the remainder of 2012 and 2013
     • Dave Hamill addresses the recommendations from Project Services for the interim release, which they would call the 2013 release. This would include reference to the Realm in the project description, joint copyright intention would require included letter of agreement. Woody notes that we should have an MOU in place in addition to a letter of agreement. Dave notes that Karen has some specifics with the MOU in addition to the letter of agreement. Public Documents need some additional help text and clarification of approval process. Ballot target dates should be included in project objectives. They also suggest adding FAQ link to project team role descriptions on wiki. Ed suggests that for #8, include short sample list of key milestones. Dave will proceed with updates and bring the updated version for approval
5. Reports: (attach written reports below from Steering Divisions et al.)
   • No e-vote last week, Lynn was sending out Work Group Health.
   • 340 registered for WGM, 94 more than Vancouver; higher than San Diego last year. Hotel sold out Friday, Saturday and Thursday.
6. Austin notes that next Monday we may need to address ad-hoc representation for International Affiliates in Baltimore as Giorgio may not be able to attend. He will reach out to Jean to see if he is available to step in.

Adjourned 12:02 PM EDT

Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date) Discussion topic: not everyone that votes on the ballot is technically up to speed and would like to see the TSC adopt a process to get involved on important technical issues going to ballot. Austin will reach out to Jean to see if he is available to step in

Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items V3 R2 Datatypes backwards compatibility - see 'Datatypes R2B discussion paper' by Lloyd McKenzie (continued) 2012-08-27 TSC Call Agenda.

© 2012 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.