Difference between revisions of "Concall-20081027"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Agenda) |
|||
Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
##*QUESTION - We have a work group that is considering creating a project to creat and ballot a HL7 2.3.1 Implementation Guide. Since 2.3.1 is no longer a supported HL7 version, should HL7 be balloting Implementation Guides for versions that are no longer supported? | ##*QUESTION - We have a work group that is considering creating a project to creat and ballot a HL7 2.3.1 Implementation Guide. Since 2.3.1 is no longer a supported HL7 version, should HL7 be balloting Implementation Guides for versions that are no longer supported? | ||
## Foundation & Technology - | ## Foundation & Technology - | ||
− | ##*QUESTION: It is unclear how providing a yearly balloted version of the RIM will affect any open-source tooling that relies on the RIM or an external SDO that wishes to | + | ##*QUESTION: It is unclear how providing a yearly balloted version of the RIM will affect any open-source tooling that relies on the RIM or an external SDO that wishes to harmonize its information models with HL7. These are questions the TSC needs to answer. |
## Structure & Semantic Design - | ## Structure & Semantic Design - | ||
##*Request from Alschuler to approve balloting the Assessment template document in upcoming ballot cycle. [http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/tracker/download.php/52/313/794/583/HL7%20Project%20Scope%20Statement-Assessmenttemplate%20v81.doc] From Alschuler: Unless I hear objections raised, will continue to assume that we can move ahead with this for the Dec/Jan cycle. The rationale for the push is to meet the requirement identified by HITSP. Note that Patient Care is a co-sponsor of the ballot (Willem and others were on the call with us this morning) and that we have added IHE and HITSP as interested parties. | ##*Request from Alschuler to approve balloting the Assessment template document in upcoming ballot cycle. [http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/tracker/download.php/52/313/794/583/HL7%20Project%20Scope%20Statement-Assessmenttemplate%20v81.doc] From Alschuler: Unless I hear objections raised, will continue to assume that we can move ahead with this for the Dec/Jan cycle. The rationale for the push is to meet the requirement identified by HITSP. Note that Patient Care is a co-sponsor of the ballot (Willem and others were on the call with us this morning) and that we have added IHE and HITSP as interested parties. |
Revision as of 14:24, 27 October 2008
TSC - Technical Steering Committee
Monday, October 27, 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: 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); Ed Tripp (newly elected TSC member); Ravi Natarajan (newly elected TSC member)
Apologies
- Gregg Seppala
- Ioana Singureanu
Agenda
- (5 min) Meeting Admin
- Roll Call - The following individuals joined the call:
- Accept Agenda -
- Approve Minutes from concall-20081013 -
- eVote Results (SD projects):
- TB DAM project- passed with 6 in favor, 0 against, 0 abstentions
- Composite Privacy Consent Directive, R1 project - passed with 6 in favor, 0 against, 0 abstentions. QUESTION RAISED: SD does have a question about #2 Composite Privacy Consent Directive, would like to ask for clarification now on the V3 Document/CDA component and also clarification on the realm?
- Public Health Related CMET project - passed with 6 in favor, 0 against, 0 abstentions
- RIM annual balloting project - passed with 6 in favor, 0 against, 0 abstentions
- Patient Administration derived CMET project - passed with 6 in favor, 0 against, 0 abstentions
- V3 Organization Registries, R2 project - passed with 5 in favor, 0 against, 1 abstention
- V3 Provider Registries, R1 project - passed with 6 in favor, 0 against, 0 abstentions
- GELLO V1 IG project - passed with 5 in favor, 0 against, 1 abstention
- HL7 EHR Clinical Research Functional Profile project - passed with 6 in favor, 0 against, 0 abstentions
- Account and Billing CMET project - passed with 5 in favor, 0 against, 1 abstention
- Consumer Information Accolunt Project - passed with 5 in favor, 0 against, 1 abstention
- Common Clinical Project - passed with 5 in favor, 0 against, 1 abstention
- (20 min) Standing Committee Reports/Approvals
- CEO Report -
- CTO Report - Quinn submitted the following report via email [1]
- ArB Report -
- Recommendation for public posting/dispositioning of SAEAF document comments
- Affiliates Report -
- Domain Experts -
- MOTION by SD: To approve the updated ICSR R3 project scope [2]
- QUESTION - We have a work group that is considering creating a project to creat and ballot a HL7 2.3.1 Implementation Guide. Since 2.3.1 is no longer a supported HL7 version, should HL7 be balloting Implementation Guides for versions that are no longer supported?
- Foundation & Technology -
- QUESTION: It is unclear how providing a yearly balloted version of the RIM will affect any open-source tooling that relies on the RIM or an external SDO that wishes to harmonize its information models with HL7. These are questions the TSC needs to answer.
- Structure & Semantic Design -
- Request from Alschuler to approve balloting the Assessment template document in upcoming ballot cycle. [3] From Alschuler: Unless I hear objections raised, will continue to assume that we can move ahead with this for the Dec/Jan cycle. The rationale for the push is to meet the requirement identified by HITSP. Note that Patient Care is a co-sponsor of the ballot (Willem and others were on the call with us this morning) and that we have added IHE and HITSP as interested parties.
- Technical & Support Services -
- Role of the SD Project Facilitator (TSC Issue: 756)
- (30 min) Discussion topics
- Review draft mission/charter template - Case (TSC Issue: 593)[4]
- Review of updated DMPs [5] - McCay
- Identifying business in agendas for upcoming WGM - McCay (TSC Issue: 761)
- Enterprise Architecture implementation project - McCay
- Infrastructure release planning - McCay
- Update on upcoming Technical Newsletter - Van Hentenryck