Concall-20071112

TSC - Technical Steering Committee

Monday, November 12th, 2007 11:00 AM (US Eastern Time, GMT -5)
To participate, dial 702-894-2444 and enter pass code 1244667#
GoToMeeting at https://www.gotomeeting.com/join/822618174
GoToMeeting ID: 822-618-174 

back to TSC Minutes and Agendas

Attendance

Expected

• Chair: Charlie McCay
• 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, Charlie McCay
• ARB Chair:
• HQ: Karen Van Hentenryck

invited

• Charles Jaffe (CE); Chuck Meyer (HL7 Chair); Ed Hammond (HL7 Chair Elect)

Apologies

• ARB Chair: Charlie Mead

Agenda

1. (5 min) Meeting Admin
   1. Roll Call - The following individuals participated on the call: John Quinn, Charlie McCay, Calvin Beebe, Ioana Singureanu, Austin Kreisler, Ed Hammond, Ken McCaslin, Karen Van Hentenryck, Helen Stevens Love, Frank Oemig, Woody Beeler
   2. Accept Agenda - Kreisler suggested discussion of the project approval process. No other changes to the agenda were suggested.
   3. Approve Minutes Concall-20071105 - MOTION by McCaslin: To approve the minutes as printed; seconded by Kreisler. Motion approved unanimously.

'(10 min) 'Standing Committee Reports

1. 1. CEO Report - No report was provided.
   2. CTO Report - Quinn reported that the V2.6 publishing issues have been resolved. He will report more thoroughly on this later in the agenda.
   3. ARB report - No report was provided
   4. Affiliates Report - no issues from the affiliates council to report Charliemccay 09:45, 9 November 2007 (PST)
   5. Domain Experts - Kreisler reported that there are a number of projects that are coming forward through the Domain Experts steering division.
   6. Foundation & Technology - Nothing new to report.
   7. Structure & Semanic Design - Nothing new to report.
   8. Technical & Support Services - McCaslin indicated there was nothing new to report but asked about the status of the action item to inform the co-chairs about the reformation of the ARB. Van Hentenryck has drafted the announcement and forwarded to Quinn for review. Quinn is reviewing it now and will send comments back shortly. The announcement will be distributed to the co-chairs before the end of the day.
2. (5 min) Planning for WGM -- Monday evening plenary, TSC and SD meeting times - McCay noted that his understanding was that all co-chairs would continue to meet on Monday evening, with the steering divisions meeting separately immediately following. ACTION ITEM: Van Hentenryck will confirm with Lillian that Beeler has requested TSC meeting space at the upcoming working group meeting and will communicate the days/times to the TSC. At the Sept. working group meeting, the TSC met on Sunday evening and on Tuesday during lunch. The Tuesday lunch conflicts with the implementors lunch, and we will looking at resolving this conflict for the May 2008 working group meeting. The TSC may also wish to look for a morning slot during the January 2008 working group meeting to meet later in the week.
3. (5 min) ISO/CEN/HL7 Joint Initiative - the role of the TSC - McCay noted that the TSC does need to play a role in managing the work that comes from the Joint Initiative. Quinn feels that the Joint Initiative should bring their projects to the TSC rather than to the individual TCs/SIGs. Hammond noted that the agreement is based on mutual understanding of priorities and workflows. The agreement was that projects would be discussed by representatives of each of the three groups and that experts from each of the three groups would be identified for each project to provide input as to the work that needed to be done and how it should progress. After those discussions, the represenatives from each of the three groups would bring the proposed projects back to their respective organizations so that they organizations could determine how best to deal with the work. Hammond supports coordination through the TSC. He feels that the projects that will require our attention through the Joint Initiative are likely to be projects on which we are already working. The following three projects have been discussed by the joint initiative: (1) regulatory standards, (2) drug administration terminology, (3) glossary of terms used in creating standards. The Project Services Committee should be involved in developing the procedures/processes for bringing their projects into HL7. Hammond also noted that the three groups are already working on proposed procedures and processes and he hopes that the TSC will allow the Joint Intiatives representatives to complete those drafts and bring them to HL7 for review and comment.
4. (5 min) Mission and Charter for the Project Services Committee - McCaslin reported that the Project Lifecycle task force will be morphing into this committee. They are tasked with helping create quality assurance and quality control steps in the HDF as well as developing education on project development. The intent is to have facilitators who are also project managers to assist the committees with their project work. The Project Services Committee would report to the TSC. McCaslin has reached out to a couple of people to co-chair this committee. Those individuals are discussing this request with their managers. Due to timing of Thanksgiving, McCaslin will not have a definitive answer from these individuals until the Dec. 3 TSC call. On that call, MacCaslin will be prepared to make a motion that the TSC accept the mission/charter of the Project Services Committee and ratify the appointment of the committee's co-chairs. McCay asked who would maintain the HDF. The proposed mission/charter assumes that maintenance of the HDF would be transferred to the Project Services Committee, but the MnM representatives feel that the methodology and how it hangs together belongs with them and that the Project Services should focus on how the committees implement the methodology to create their work products. This point should be taken back to the Foundation and Technology and technical steering for additional discussion. ACTION ITEM: MnM and the Project Services Commmittee will draft a proposal on how the details of the project work will be parsed between then.[1]
5. (5 min) issue review and processing - Status of gForge Implementation - McCaslin reported that HQ indicated that the project would be ready on GForce as of today. Singureanu will use the paper form/process that was developed and approved earlier to modify the GForge form for TSC issue reporting purposes.
6. (5 min) Interoperable Lab to EHR IG - Quinn reported that he and McCaslin discussed this issue earlier in the morning. Discussion are ongoing between the vendors and there is a separate discussion in OO. Eileen Koski (the other negative voter from Quest) has responded to HITSP indicating that there are 3 additional items that are preventing Quest from withdrawing their negative vote. The TSC will wait to hear from OO as to what that TC is willing to modify. Kreisler is the project lead for the Implementation Guide in question and would like to be included in the discussions.
7. (5 min) version 2.6 publishing update - Quinn reported that he’s had a number of discussion with Jane Foard and feels they have come to agreement/closure on all of the outstanding issues. There are a number of changes that are clearly editorial in nature that need to be made. There will also be some errata and some clarification of ambiguity. The chapters should be ready for final publication in the next few weeks.
8. (5 min) XML schema quality issues - patient care [2]- McCay reported that this issue came in very recently via the list serve. We need to ensure that there is ownership for this issue and Beeler noted that he is the owner. He needs specific instance examples, and further noted that rectifying the problem is going to be a challenge. Singureanu noted that once the problem is solved there is no way to republish the schemas. If there are problems with the XML, they should be reported to Woody Beeler. Clarifying the process should be handled in the Publishing committee. Issues should also be posted to the generator. There was a suggestion that committees ensure that their schemas, as published, are correct. Some committees don’t have the technical expertise to verify that the xml is correct.

The project process will be high on the agenda next week. Please submit standing reports to the list. Schema Quality issue will be discussed again next week or in the near future.

Call adjourned at Noon ET.