Difference between revisions of "2011-11-14 TSC Call Minutes"

From HL7 TSC
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (moved 2011-11-14 TSC Call Agenda to 2011-11-14 TSC Call Minutes: minutes (notes only - no quorum) approved)
 
(5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
  
 
===Meeting Info/Attendees===
 
===Meeting Info/Attendees===
−
{{:TSC Meetings}}
+
 
−
   [[Category:2011 TSC Minutes|Agenda Template]]
+
   [[Category:2011 TSC Minutes]]
  
 
{|border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"  
 
{|border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"  
Line 23: Line 23:
 
|width="0%"|'''Affiliation'''
 
|width="0%"|'''Affiliation'''
 
|-
 
|-
−
|?||Calvin Beebe||HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair
+
|x||Calvin Beebe||HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair
 
|-
 
|-
−
|?||Woody Beeler||HL7 FTSD Co-Chair
+
|x ||Woody Beeler||HL7 FTSD Co-Chair
 
|-
 
|-
−
|?||Bob Dolin||HL7 Board Chair
+
| ||Bob Dolin||HL7 Board Chair
 
|-
 
|-
−
|?||Freida Hall||invited guest, HL7 T3SD SD Co-Chair-elect
+
|x||Freida Hall||invited guest, HL7 T3SD SD Co-Chair-elect
 
|-
 
|-
−
|?||Tony Julian||HL7 FTSD Co-Chair
+
|x||Tony Julian||HL7 FTSD Co-Chair
 
|-
 
|-
−
|?||Austin Kreisler||HL7 TSC Chair, DESD Co-Chair
+
|x||Austin Kreisler||HL7 TSC Chair, DESD Co-Chair
 
|-
 
|-
−
|?||Lynn Laakso ||HL7 staff support
+
|x||Lynn Laakso ||HL7 staff support
 
|-
 
|-
−
|?||Patrick Loyd|| HL7 T3SD Co-Chair
+
| ||Patrick Loyd|| HL7 T3SD Co-Chair
 
|-
 
|-
−
|?||Ken McCaslin||HL7 T3SD Co-Chair
+
|x ||Ken McCaslin||HL7 T3SD Co-Chair
 
|-
 
|-
−
|?||Charlie Mead||HL7 ArB Chair
+
| ||Charlie Mead||HL7 ArB Chair
 
|-
 
|-
−
|?||Ravi Natarajan||HL7 Affiliate Representative
+
| ||Ravi Natarajan||HL7 Affiliate Representative
 
|-
 
|-
−
|?||Ron Parker||HL7 ArB Alternate
+
| ||Ron Parker||HL7 ArB Alternate
 
|-
 
|-
 
|regrets||John Quinn||HL7 CTO
 
|regrets||John Quinn||HL7 CTO
 
|-
 
|-
−
|?||Ed Tripp||HL7 DESD Co-Chair
+
|regrets||Ed Tripp||HL7 DESD Co-Chair
−
|-
 
−
|?||Pat Van Dyke||HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair
 
−
|-
 
−
|?||Mead Walker||invited guest, HL7 DESD SD Co-Chair-elect
 
 
|-
 
|-
−
| || ||  
+
|x ||Pat Van Dyke||HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair
 
|-
 
|-
−
| || ||
+
| ||Mead Walker||invited guest, HL7 DESD SD Co-Chair-elect
 
|-
 
|-
 
|colspan="3" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|
 
|colspan="3" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|
Line 65: Line 61:
 
{|border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"  
 
{|border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"  
 
|-
 
|-
−
|colspan="3" |'''Quorum Requirements (Chair +5 with 2 SD Reps) Met: '''(yes/No)
+
|colspan="3" |'''Quorum Requirements (Chair +5 with 2 SD Reps) Met: No'''
 
|-
 
|-
 
|}
 
|}
Line 72: Line 68:
 
#Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests)
 
#Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests)
 
#Agenda review and approval - Austin Kreisler
 
#Agenda review and approval - Austin Kreisler
−
#Approve Minutes
+
#Approve Minutes of [[2011-11-07 TSC Call Agenda]]
 
#Review [http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/tsc/tracker/?action=TrackerItemBrowse&tracker_id=494 action items] –
 
#Review [http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/tsc/tracker/?action=TrackerItemBrowse&tracker_id=494 action items] –
 
#*Ken will report back on Karen’s opinion on the ONC S&I LRI downgrade.  
 
#*Ken will report back on Karen’s opinion on the ONC S&I LRI downgrade.  
Line 122: Line 118:
 
#*** TSC - HL7 Templates Registry Business Process Requirements Analysis, Release 1 (Comment Only Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 829
 
#*** TSC - HL7 Templates Registry Business Process Requirements Analysis, Release 1 (Comment Only Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 829
 
#*Process for Work Groups changing steering divisions
 
#*Process for Work Groups changing steering divisions
 +
#**Proposed process: Work group submits petition to change steering divisions for both its current steering division and proposed steering division. Both steering divisions need to approve petition based upon their decision making practices. Work Group may appeal steering division decisions to the TSC.
 
#*Reminder: Pilot product brief website review feedback accepted until November 15th.
 
#*Reminder: Pilot product brief website review feedback accepted until November 15th.
 
#*Reminder: TSC members please complete the CTO evaluation
 
#*Reminder: TSC members please complete the CTO evaluation
Line 134: Line 131:
 
===Minutes===
 
===Minutes===
 
'''Minutes/Conclusions Reached:'''<br/>
 
'''Minutes/Conclusions Reached:'''<br/>
 +
Austin called the meeting to order at 11:07AM
 +
#Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests) none identified
 +
#Agenda review and approval - Austin Kreisler; lacking quorum, may have to defer approval items
 +
#Review [http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/tsc/tracker/?action=TrackerItemBrowse&tracker_id=494 action items] –
 +
#*Ken will report back on Karen’s opinion on the ONC S&I LRI downgrade.
 +
#*:Moving lab IG from normative track to DSTU – Ken has not yet done this. ANSI suitability is the issue for change from Normative to DSTU or Informative. Project was approved as Informative in TSC Tracker 1972 for 2011-07-11.
 +
#*[http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/tsc/tracker/?action=TrackerItemEdit&tracker_item_id=2060&start=0 Tracker #2060] Ken will create Strategic Dashboard criteria metrics recommendations for: Industry responsiveness and easier implementation
 +
#*:Ken has proposed that projects continue to be identified as important to a strategic initiative, rather than removing that area on the project scope statement. If a project is being initiated specifically for a strategic initiative project then it must be identified in some way. Austin notes that we have not historically been using those checkboxes to identify which SI their project is aligned with.  Ken notes that we need to help Project Services to identify SI projects that are not specifically in support of an SI. Woody notes that many projects are in alignment with a SI. Ken is looking to harvest information to know when a project is for a strategic initiative, for placement on the dashboard. Then we can measure those projects for green/yellow/red.  Austin notes that such measurement is not restricted solely to projects. Ken notes that without deriving objective information from projects it will be a heavily manual, subjective process and resources would be needed. Ken was going to work with Dave to recategorize the existing projects among the three initiatives now in place. Austin uses an example of WGM effectiveness as a measure that cannot be generated from project information.  Woody adds some measures are related to the ballot itself.  Austin was not constraining himself to those measurements that can be automated. Ken notes that even the survey on WGM effectiveness you have to drill down to the comments to find constructive information. Austin notes that rolling up all projects under three categories will be difficult to measure since some of the items under each category are under the TSC and some are not. We have to be able to collect data at the next layer down. Woody notes that the indication of strategic initiative on the scope statement is not as precise as it needs to be but it gives us a place to start. Ken and Dave would do the assessment and bring it back to the TSC for review.
 +
#*[http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/tsc/tracker/?action=TrackerItemEdit&tracker_item_id=2059&start=0 Tracker #2059] Austin will create Strategic Dashboard criteria metrics for: Requirements traceability and cross-artifact consistency
 +
#**Requirements traceability - Tied to HL7 roll out of SAIF ECCF. measure is the number of milestones completed
 +
#***Informative SAIF Canonical document published
 +
#***DSTU SAIF Canonical document published
 +
#***Normative SAIF Canonical document published
 +
#***Peer Reviewed HL7 SAIF IG including ECCF chapter and draft SAIF Artifact Definitions
 +
#***DSTU HL7 SAIF IG published
 +
#***Normative HL7 SAIF IG published
 +
#***SAIF Architecture Program experimental phase of HL7 SAIF ECCF implementation completed
 +
#***SAIF AP trial use phase of HL7 SAIF ECCF implementation completed
 +
#***HL7 SAIF ECCF rolled to all work groups working on applicable standards (V3 primarily)
 +
#**Cross-artifact consistency
 +
#***Percent of Work groups in FTSD, SSDSD and DESD participating in RIM/Vocab/Pattern Harmonization meetings, calculated as a 3 trimester moving average
 +
#***Survey of newly published standards via the publication request form
 +
#****V3 Standards - Measure - Green: All new standards have one or more of the following checked; Yellow: 1-2 standards have none of the following checked; Red: 3 or more standards have none of the following checked
 +
#*****Standard uses CMETs from COCT domain
 +
#*****Standard drawn from common Domain Model including Clinical Statement, Common Product Model, ???
 +
#*****Standard uses harmonized design patterns (as defined through RIM Pattern harmonization process)
 +
#**Austin notes that these are not necessarily automated metrics for the criteria.
 +
#*[http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/tsc/tracker/?action=TrackerItemEdit&tracker_item_id=2058&start=0 Tracker #2058] Woody will create Strategic Dashboard criteria metrics for: Product Quality
 +
#**Measure is the average number of ballot cycles necessary to pass a normative standard. Calculated as a 3 trimester moving average based on publication requests. Add a new field to publication request to document number of ballot cycles required to pass normative ballot.
 +
#***Green: 1-2 ballot cycles
 +
#***Yellow: 3-4 ballot cycles
 +
#***Red: 5+ ballot cycles
 +
#**Woody was going to look at
 +
#**#creating schemas that actually validate,
 +
#**#the presence of line-level comments in a static model
 +
#**#Projects at risk of becoming stale 2 cycles after last ballot
 +
#**#Two cycles since last ballot but not posting reconciliation or request for publication for normative edition
 +
#**#items going into third or higher level of balloting for a normative specification; it’s ok to be flagged as a concern while the process is ongoing; doesn't mean it’s a measure of quality once it has finished balloting.
 +
#*Lynn will move these to a specific wiki page to develop these further. Make a standing agenda item to report progress on proposals. Ken will work with Dave Hamill to sort the existing projects under the three criteria and develop instruction on the use of the strategic initiatives checkbox. They’ll use the 2012 SI criteria. Ken will ask Dave to present their findings next week.
 +
#Austin proposes skipping the meeting on the 28th, to be decided next week. Austin asks Lynn to set up an email vote for naming Freida to represent Ken for the next two weeks.
 +
#*[http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/tsc/tracker/?action=TrackerItemEdit&tracker_item_id=2057&start=0 Tracker #2057] Patrick will create Strategic Dashboard criteria metrics for: WGM Effectiveness
 +
<!--              -->
 +
<!--  Discussion  -->
 +
#Discussion topics:
 +
#*Process for Work Groups changing steering divisions
 +
#**Proposed process: Work group submits petition to change steering divisions for both its current steering division and proposed steering division. Both steering divisions need to approve petition based upon their decision making practices. Work Group may appeal steering division decisions to the TSC.
 +
#**Calvin notes they could make a swap – CG for II. Ken feels the Steering Division co-chairs should initiate the process, rather than the WG co-chairs initiating the process. Freida notes that this determination should be a suggestion for the GOM. We’re planning on inviting the GOC December 5th to discuss other changes; we can add that to the agenda once a recommendation is agreed upon.
 +
#*Reminder: Pilot product brief website review feedback accepted until November 15th.
 +
#*Reminder: TSC members please complete the CTO evaluation
 +
#*Reminder: Feedback on [http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=TSC_Guidance_on_Ballot_Levels TSC_Guidance_on_Ballot_Levels] accepted until November 30th
 +
#*Add to next week’s agenda a discussion on upcoming TSC call scheduling over the holidays, December 26th, Jan 2nd and November 28th.
  
  
−
'''''Please don't forget to hang up from the conference call '' (VOIP users)'''
 
 
===Next Steps===
 
===Next Steps===
 
{|border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"  
 
{|border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"  
 
|-
 
|-
 
|colspan="4" |'''Actions''' ''(Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)''<br/>
 
|colspan="4" |'''Actions''' ''(Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)''<br/>
−
* .
+
*Lynn will move the proposed SI dashboard criteria to a specific wiki page to develop these further, and make a standing agenda item to report progress on proposals - see [[Strategic Initiatives TSC Dashboard]].
 +
*Ken will work with Dave Hamill to sort the existing projects under the three criteria and develop instruction on the use of the strategic initiatives checkbox, using the 2012 SI criteria.
 +
*Ken will ask Dave to present their findings next week .
 +
*Lynn to set up an email vote for naming Freida to represent Ken for the next two weeks.
 
|-
 
|-
 
|colspan="4" |'''Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items'''<br/>
 
|colspan="4" |'''Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items'''<br/>
−
*.
+
#Approve Minutes of [[2011-11-14 TSC Call Agenda]]
 +
<!--    Approvals  -->
 +
#Approval items:
 +
#*'''Motion: ''' Approve '''''*final*''''' [http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/trackeritem/2109/8856/HL7SAIFAPRiskAssessmentPSSv1.2.docx Project Scope Statement] for TSC cosponsors suggested are ArB and MnM, ''Risk Assessment and Governance for SAIF Architecture Program'' at [http://www.hl7.org/special/Committees/projman/searchableProjectIndex.cfm?action=edit&ProjectNumber=828 Project Insight # 828] and [http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/tsc/tracker/?action=TrackerItemEdit&tracker_item_id=2109&start=0 TSC Tracker # 2109]
 +
#* '''Tabled Motion: ''' Approve [http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/trackeritem/2104/8838/HL7PublicationRequestfortheSecurityandPrivacyDAMDSTU.docx DSTU Publication Request] for Security WG of FTSD: ''V3 Security DAM, R1'' (Composite Security and Privacy Domain Analysis Model aka Security Domain Analysis Model) at [http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/tsc/tracker/?action=TrackerItemEdit&tracker_item_id=2104&start=0 TSC Tracker # 2104], [http://www.hl7.org/special/Committees/projman/searchableProjectIndex.cfm?action=edit&ProjectNumber=529 Project Insight # 529]
 +
#**[http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/trackeritem/2104/8860/Security_DAM_emailthread.pdf Woody's followup background email]
 +
#**Please note: Kathleen sent an .emx file and Don is not able to publish from this.
 +
#*(10 min) Modeling vs terminology (continued)
 +
#**:Discussion thread: Universal/Perfect vs Simple/Done/Usable (was RE: Allergy Question)
 +
#*TSC review of [http://www.hl7.org/documentcenter/public/ballots/2012JAN/announcements/Formation%20of%20Ballot%20Pools%20for%20January%202012%20Ballot%20Cycle.pdf Jan 2012 Ballot] Anomalies, and [http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/trackeritem/2114/8885/TSCBallotApprovalsforJanuary2012.docx TSC Approval Requests]
 +
#**3RD+ BALLOT CYCLE
 +
#*** HL7 Implementation Guide for CDA® Release 2: Genetic Testing Reports, Release 1 (4th Comment Only Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 460
 +
#*** HL7 Version 3 Standard: Identification of Medicinal Products – Creation and Maintenance Messages, Release 1 (3rd DSTU Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 501
 +
#*** HL7 Version 3 Standard: Pharmacy; Medication Knowledge-Base Query, Release 1 (7th Normative Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 189
 +
#**PENDING PROJECT APPROVAL
 +
#*** TSC - XML Encoding Rules for Version 2 Messages, Release 2 (1st Normative Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 825
 +
#*** SD & TSC - HL7 Version 2 Implementation Guide: Clinical Genomics; fully LOINC-Qualified Cytogenetic Model, Release 1 - US Realm (1st Informative Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 663
 +
#*** TSC - HL7 Templates Registry Business Process Requirements Analysis, Release 1 (Comment Only Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 829
 
|}
 
|}

Latest revision as of 21:23, 7 December 2011

TSC Agenda/Minutes

Meeting Info/Attendees

HL7 TSC Meeting Minutes

Location: call 770-657-9270 using code 124466#
GoToMeeting ID: 165-215-206

Date: 2011-11-14
Time: 11:00 AM U.S. Eastern
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
Bob Dolin HL7 Board Chair
x Freida Hall invited guest, HL7 T3SD SD Co-Chair-elect
x Tony Julian HL7 FTSD Co-Chair
x Austin Kreisler HL7 TSC Chair, DESD Co-Chair
x Lynn Laakso HL7 staff support
Patrick Loyd HL7 T3SD Co-Chair
x Ken McCaslin HL7 T3SD Co-Chair
Charlie Mead HL7 ArB Chair
Ravi Natarajan HL7 Affiliate Representative
Ron Parker HL7 ArB Alternate
regrets John Quinn HL7 CTO
regrets Ed Tripp HL7 DESD Co-Chair
x Pat Van Dyke HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair
Mead Walker invited guest, HL7 DESD SD Co-Chair-elect


Quorum Requirements (Chair +5 with 2 SD Reps) Met: No

Agenda

Agenda Topics

  1. Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests)
  2. Agenda review and approval - Austin Kreisler
  3. Approve Minutes of 2011-11-07 TSC Call Agenda
  4. Review action items –
    • Ken will report back on Karen’s opinion on the ONC S&I LRI downgrade.
    • Tracker #2060 Ken will create Strategic Dashboard criteria metrics recommendations for: Industry responsiveness and easier implementation
    • Tracker #2059 Austin will create Strategic Dashboard criteria metrics for: Requirements traceability and cross-artifact consistency
      • Requirements traceability - Tied to HL7 roll out of SAIF ECCF. measure is the number of milestones completed
        • Informative SAIF Canonical document published
        • DSTU SAIF Canonical document published
        • Normative SAIF Canonical document published
        • Peer Reviewed HL7 SAIF IG including ECCF chapter and draft SAIF Artifact Definitions
        • DSTU HL7 SAIF IG published
        • Normative HL7 SAIF IG published
        • SAIF Architecture Program experimental phase of HL7 SAIF ECCF implementation completed
        • SAIF AP trial use phase of HL7 SAIF ECCF implementation completed
        • HL7 SAIF ECCF rolled to all work groups working on applicable standards (V3 primarily)
      • Cross-artifact consistency
        • Percent of Work groups in FTSD, SSDSD and DESD participating in RIM/Vocab/Pattern Harmonization meetings, calculated as a 3 trimester moving average
        • Survey of newly published standards via the publication request form
          • V3 Standards - Measure - Green: All new standards have one or more of the following checked; Yellow: 1-2 standards have none of the following checked; Red: 3 or more standards have none of the following checked
            • Standard uses CMETs from COCT domain
            • Standard drawn from common Domain Model including Clinical Statement, Common Product Model, ???
            • Standard uses harmonized design patterns (as defined through RIM Pattern harmonization process)
    • Tracker #2058 Woody will create Strategic Dashboard criteria metrics for: Product Quality
      • Measure is the average number of ballot cycles necessary to pass a normative standard. Calculated as a 3 trimester moving average based on publication requests. Add a new field to publication request to document number of ballot cycles required to pass normative ballot.
        • Green: 1-2 ballot cycles
        • Yellow: 3-4 ballot cycles
        • Red: 5+ ballot cycles
    • Tracker #2057 Patrick will create Strategic Dashboard criteria metrics for: WGM Effectiveness
  5. Approval items:
  6. Discussion topics:
    • (10 min) Modeling vs terminology (continued)
      • Discussion thread: Universal/Perfect vs Simple/Done/Usable (was RE: Allergy Question)
    • TSC review of Jan 2012 Ballot Anomalies, and TSC Approval Requests
      • 3RD+ BALLOT CYCLE
        • HL7 Implementation Guide for CDA® Release 2: Genetic Testing Reports, Release 1 (4th Comment Only Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 460
        • HL7 Version 3 Standard: Identification of Medicinal Products – Creation and Maintenance Messages, Release 1 (3rd DSTU Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 501
        • HL7 Version 3 Standard: Pharmacy; Medication Knowledge-Base Query, Release 1 (7th Normative Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 189
      • PENDING PROJECT APPROVAL
        • TSC - XML Encoding Rules for Version 2 Messages, Release 2 (1st Normative Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 825
        • SD & TSC - HL7 Version 2 Implementation Guide: Clinical Genomics; fully LOINC-Qualified Cytogenetic Model, Release 1 - US Realm (1st Informative Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 663
        • TSC - HL7 Templates Registry Business Process Requirements Analysis, Release 1 (Comment Only Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 829
    • Process for Work Groups changing steering divisions
      • Proposed process: Work group submits petition to change steering divisions for both its current steering division and proposed steering division. Both steering divisions need to approve petition based upon their decision making practices. Work Group may appeal steering division decisions to the TSC.
    • Reminder: Pilot product brief website review feedback accepted until November 15th.
    • Reminder: TSC members please complete the CTO evaluation
    • Reminder: Feedback on TSC_Guidance_on_Ballot_Levels accepted until November 30th
  7. Reports: (attach written reports below from Steering Divisions et al.)
  8. Open Issues List


Supporting Documents

  • See links

Minutes

Minutes/Conclusions Reached:
Austin called the meeting to order at 11:07AM

  1. Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests) none identified
  2. Agenda review and approval - Austin Kreisler; lacking quorum, may have to defer approval items
  3. Review action items –
    • Ken will report back on Karen’s opinion on the ONC S&I LRI downgrade.
      Moving lab IG from normative track to DSTU – Ken has not yet done this. ANSI suitability is the issue for change from Normative to DSTU or Informative. Project was approved as Informative in TSC Tracker 1972 for 2011-07-11.
    • Tracker #2060 Ken will create Strategic Dashboard criteria metrics recommendations for: Industry responsiveness and easier implementation
      Ken has proposed that projects continue to be identified as important to a strategic initiative, rather than removing that area on the project scope statement. If a project is being initiated specifically for a strategic initiative project then it must be identified in some way. Austin notes that we have not historically been using those checkboxes to identify which SI their project is aligned with. Ken notes that we need to help Project Services to identify SI projects that are not specifically in support of an SI. Woody notes that many projects are in alignment with a SI. Ken is looking to harvest information to know when a project is for a strategic initiative, for placement on the dashboard. Then we can measure those projects for green/yellow/red. Austin notes that such measurement is not restricted solely to projects. Ken notes that without deriving objective information from projects it will be a heavily manual, subjective process and resources would be needed. Ken was going to work with Dave to recategorize the existing projects among the three initiatives now in place. Austin uses an example of WGM effectiveness as a measure that cannot be generated from project information. Woody adds some measures are related to the ballot itself. Austin was not constraining himself to those measurements that can be automated. Ken notes that even the survey on WGM effectiveness you have to drill down to the comments to find constructive information. Austin notes that rolling up all projects under three categories will be difficult to measure since some of the items under each category are under the TSC and some are not. We have to be able to collect data at the next layer down. Woody notes that the indication of strategic initiative on the scope statement is not as precise as it needs to be but it gives us a place to start. Ken and Dave would do the assessment and bring it back to the TSC for review.
    • Tracker #2059 Austin will create Strategic Dashboard criteria metrics for: Requirements traceability and cross-artifact consistency
      • Requirements traceability - Tied to HL7 roll out of SAIF ECCF. measure is the number of milestones completed
        • Informative SAIF Canonical document published
        • DSTU SAIF Canonical document published
        • Normative SAIF Canonical document published
        • Peer Reviewed HL7 SAIF IG including ECCF chapter and draft SAIF Artifact Definitions
        • DSTU HL7 SAIF IG published
        • Normative HL7 SAIF IG published
        • SAIF Architecture Program experimental phase of HL7 SAIF ECCF implementation completed
        • SAIF AP trial use phase of HL7 SAIF ECCF implementation completed
        • HL7 SAIF ECCF rolled to all work groups working on applicable standards (V3 primarily)
      • Cross-artifact consistency
        • Percent of Work groups in FTSD, SSDSD and DESD participating in RIM/Vocab/Pattern Harmonization meetings, calculated as a 3 trimester moving average
        • Survey of newly published standards via the publication request form
          • V3 Standards - Measure - Green: All new standards have one or more of the following checked; Yellow: 1-2 standards have none of the following checked; Red: 3 or more standards have none of the following checked
            • Standard uses CMETs from COCT domain
            • Standard drawn from common Domain Model including Clinical Statement, Common Product Model, ???
            • Standard uses harmonized design patterns (as defined through RIM Pattern harmonization process)
      • Austin notes that these are not necessarily automated metrics for the criteria.
    • Tracker #2058 Woody will create Strategic Dashboard criteria metrics for: Product Quality
      • Measure is the average number of ballot cycles necessary to pass a normative standard. Calculated as a 3 trimester moving average based on publication requests. Add a new field to publication request to document number of ballot cycles required to pass normative ballot.
        • Green: 1-2 ballot cycles
        • Yellow: 3-4 ballot cycles
        • Red: 5+ ballot cycles
      • Woody was going to look at
        1. creating schemas that actually validate,
        2. the presence of line-level comments in a static model
        3. Projects at risk of becoming stale 2 cycles after last ballot
        4. Two cycles since last ballot but not posting reconciliation or request for publication for normative edition
        5. items going into third or higher level of balloting for a normative specification; it’s ok to be flagged as a concern while the process is ongoing; doesn't mean it’s a measure of quality once it has finished balloting.
    • Lynn will move these to a specific wiki page to develop these further. Make a standing agenda item to report progress on proposals. Ken will work with Dave Hamill to sort the existing projects under the three criteria and develop instruction on the use of the strategic initiatives checkbox. They’ll use the 2012 SI criteria. Ken will ask Dave to present their findings next week.
  4. Austin proposes skipping the meeting on the 28th, to be decided next week. Austin asks Lynn to set up an email vote for naming Freida to represent Ken for the next two weeks.
    • Tracker #2057 Patrick will create Strategic Dashboard criteria metrics for: WGM Effectiveness
  5. Discussion topics:
    • Process for Work Groups changing steering divisions
      • Proposed process: Work group submits petition to change steering divisions for both its current steering division and proposed steering division. Both steering divisions need to approve petition based upon their decision making practices. Work Group may appeal steering division decisions to the TSC.
      • Calvin notes they could make a swap – CG for II. Ken feels the Steering Division co-chairs should initiate the process, rather than the WG co-chairs initiating the process. Freida notes that this determination should be a suggestion for the GOM. We’re planning on inviting the GOC December 5th to discuss other changes; we can add that to the agenda once a recommendation is agreed upon.
    • Reminder: Pilot product brief website review feedback accepted until November 15th.
    • Reminder: TSC members please complete the CTO evaluation
    • Reminder: Feedback on TSC_Guidance_on_Ballot_Levels accepted until November 30th
    • Add to next week’s agenda a discussion on upcoming TSC call scheduling over the holidays, December 26th, Jan 2nd and November 28th.


Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
  • Lynn will move the proposed SI dashboard criteria to a specific wiki page to develop these further, and make a standing agenda item to report progress on proposals - see Strategic Initiatives TSC Dashboard.
  • Ken will work with Dave Hamill to sort the existing projects under the three criteria and develop instruction on the use of the strategic initiatives checkbox, using the 2012 SI criteria.
  • Ken will ask Dave to present their findings next week .
  • Lynn to set up an email vote for naming Freida to represent Ken for the next two weeks.
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items
  1. Approve Minutes of 2011-11-14 TSC Call Agenda
  2. Approval items:
    • Motion: Approve *final* Project Scope Statement for TSC cosponsors suggested are ArB and MnM, Risk Assessment and Governance for SAIF Architecture Program at Project Insight # 828 and TSC Tracker # 2109
    • Tabled Motion: Approve DSTU Publication Request for Security WG of FTSD: V3 Security DAM, R1 (Composite Security and Privacy Domain Analysis Model aka Security Domain Analysis Model) at TSC Tracker # 2104, Project Insight # 529
    • (10 min) Modeling vs terminology (continued)
      • Discussion thread: Universal/Perfect vs Simple/Done/Usable (was RE: Allergy Question)
    • TSC review of Jan 2012 Ballot Anomalies, and TSC Approval Requests
      • 3RD+ BALLOT CYCLE
        • HL7 Implementation Guide for CDA® Release 2: Genetic Testing Reports, Release 1 (4th Comment Only Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 460
        • HL7 Version 3 Standard: Identification of Medicinal Products – Creation and Maintenance Messages, Release 1 (3rd DSTU Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 501
        • HL7 Version 3 Standard: Pharmacy; Medication Knowledge-Base Query, Release 1 (7th Normative Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 189
      • PENDING PROJECT APPROVAL
        • TSC - XML Encoding Rules for Version 2 Messages, Release 2 (1st Normative Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 825
        • SD & TSC - HL7 Version 2 Implementation Guide: Clinical Genomics; fully LOINC-Qualified Cytogenetic Model, Release 1 - US Realm (1st Informative Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 663
        • TSC - HL7 Templates Registry Business Process Requirements Analysis, Release 1 (Comment Only Ballot) – Project Insight ID: 829
Retrieved from "https://tscwiki.hl7.org/w/index.php?title=2011-11-14_TSC_Call_Minutes&oldid=8986"