Difference between revisions of "Concall-20080707"
(→Agenda) |
|||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
##Roll Call - | ##Roll Call - | ||
##Accept Agenda - | ##Accept Agenda - | ||
| − | ##Approve Minutes from [[concall- | + | ##Approve Minutes from [[concall-20080623]] - |
#'''''(20 min)'' Standing Committee Reports/Approvals''' | #'''''(20 min)'' Standing Committee Reports/Approvals''' | ||
## CEO Report - | ## CEO Report - | ||
| Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
## Domain Experts - | ## Domain Experts - | ||
## Foundation & Technology - | ## Foundation & Technology - | ||
| − | ## Structure & Semantic Design - | + | ## Structure & Semantic Design - MOTION by SD: To approve the Order Sets Publication project porpoals |
| + | Follow up on Follow up on the outstanding questions raised during the review of the Order Set Publication Project Proposal: | ||
| + | |||
| + | 1. Specific contact name from implementers listed: | ||
| + | The proposal notes:Implementers (2 Mandatory for DSTU projects): | ||
| + | 1)Thomson-Reuters: JERRY OSHEROFF (Jerry.Osheroff@thomson.com) | ||
| + | 2) Wolters Kluwer: HOWARD STRASBERG (Howard.Strasberg@wolterskluwer.com) | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | 2. Clarification on the breadth of coordination and acknowledgment of OO in the context of this standard, ideally as co-sponsors. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The group is willing to have OO acknowledged as co-sponsor, and has met with OO, SD and PC multiple times as noted below in thier response. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | 3. Looks as though there was a May 2007 ballot, and therefore an existing project. How does this proposed project relate? If it exists, this should be an amendment of the old one. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The project proposal submitted represents an amendment to the pre-existing Project Proposal which was in the old format, they simply migrated to the new Project Proposal form for the same project. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
## Technical & Support Services - | ## Technical & Support Services - | ||
#'''''(30 min)'' Discussion topics''' | #'''''(30 min)'' Discussion topics''' | ||
## | ## | ||
| − | ## | + | ## |
| + | |||
=[[TSC Agenda item list|Agenda item list (our sand box for future meetings)]]= | =[[TSC Agenda item list|Agenda item list (our sand box for future meetings)]]= | ||
=[[TSC Action item list|Click for TSC Action Item List]]= | =[[TSC Action item list|Click for TSC Action Item List]]= | ||
Revision as of 22:09, 2 July 2008
TSC - Technical Steering Committee
Monday, July 7th, 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: 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,
- ARB Chair: Charlie Mead
- HQ: Karen Van Hentenryck
invited
- Charles Jaffe (CEO); Ed Hammond (HL7 Chair); Chuck Meyer (HL7 Vice Chair)
Apologies
Austin Kreisler
Agenda
- (5 min) Meeting Admin
- Roll Call -
- Accept Agenda -
- Approve Minutes from concall-20080623 -
- (20 min) Standing Committee Reports/Approvals
- CEO Report -
- CTO Report -
- ARB report -
- Affiliates Report -
- Domain Experts -
- Foundation & Technology -
- Structure & Semantic Design - MOTION by SD: To approve the Order Sets Publication project porpoals
Follow up on Follow up on the outstanding questions raised during the review of the Order Set Publication Project Proposal:
1. Specific contact name from implementers listed: The proposal notes:Implementers (2 Mandatory for DSTU projects): 1)Thomson-Reuters: JERRY OSHEROFF (Jerry.Osheroff@thomson.com) 2) Wolters Kluwer: HOWARD STRASBERG (Howard.Strasberg@wolterskluwer.com)
2. Clarification on the breadth of coordination and acknowledgment of OO in the context of this standard, ideally as co-sponsors.
The group is willing to have OO acknowledged as co-sponsor, and has met with OO, SD and PC multiple times as noted below in thier response.
3. Looks as though there was a May 2007 ballot, and therefore an existing project. How does this proposed project relate? If it exists, this should be an amendment of the old one.
The project proposal submitted represents an amendment to the pre-existing Project Proposal which was in the old format, they simply migrated to the new Project Proposal form for the same project.
- Technical & Support Services -
- (30 min) Discussion topics
