2016-04-25 TSC Call Agenda
TSC Agenda/Minutes
Meeting Info/Attendees
Standing Conference Calls
TSC will hold a Conference Call at 11AM Eastern time, each Monday except during scheduled face-to-face Working Group Meetings unless otherwise noted at TSC_Minutes_and_Agendas.
- GoToMeeting at https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/426505829 using VOIP
- For those without access to microphone/speakers:
- US: +1 (224)501-3318
- Canada: +1 (647)497-9379
- Italy: +39 0 230 57 81 80
- Access Code: 426-505-829
- GoToMeeting ID: 426-505-829
| HL7 TSC Meeting Minutes Location: GoToMeeting ID: 426-505-829 |
Date: 2016-04-25 Time: 11:00 AM U.S. Eastern | |
| Facilitator: Ken McCaslin | Note taker(s): Anne Wizauer | |
| Quorum = chair + 5 including 2 SD represented | yes/no | ||||||
| Chair/CTO | ArB | International Affiliate Rep | Ad-Hoc | ||||
| x | Ken McCaslin | x | Tony Julian | . | Jean Duteau | x | Austin Kreisler |
| x | Wayne Kubick | x | Lorraine Constable | . | Giorgio Cangioli | x | Freida Hall, GOM Expert |
| . | . | . | . | Woody Beeler, TSC Member Emeritus | |||
| Domain Experts | Foundation and Technology | Structure and Semantic Design | Technical and Support Services | ||||
| x | Melva Peters | . | Russ Hamm | x | Calvin Beebe | x | Andy Stechishin |
| x | John Roberts | x | Paul Knapp | x | Gora Datta | x | Sandra Stuart |
| . | . | . | . | ||||
| ex officio | Invited Guests | Observers | HL7 Staff | ||||
| . | Pat Van Dyke (HL7 Chair) w/vote | x | Dave Hammil | x | Jessica Basa | x | Anne Wizauer |
| . | Chuck Jaffe (CEO) |
. | . | . | obs2 | . |
|
| . | . | . | . | . | |||
Agenda
- Housekeeping
- Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests)
- Agenda review and approval -
- Approve Minutes of 2016-04-18 TSC Call Agenda
- XML Vulnerability - Wayne
- Review action items –
- Followup on Project Approval request for the TSC project Revise Process to Withdraw Protocol Specifications
- ARB to add to agenda
- Melva to report back on Anesthesia move to Health Care Devices
- Followup on Project Approval request for the TSC project Revise Process to Withdraw Protocol Specifications
- Approval items from last week's e-vote referred for discussion:
- Updated 2016 PSS Template Review and Summary of Edits
- Referred by Wayne: Suggested changes here
- How best to communicate the PSS Updates in Montreal at Monday evening's Co-Chair dinner
- Updated 2016 PSS Template Review and Summary of Edits
- Approval items from last week's e-vote approved 6/0/0 with DESD, T3SD, Austin, Freida, Giorgio, and Wayne voting:
- Normative Publication Request by the MnM WG of the FTSD of HL7 Version 3 Reference Information Model, Release 7 at Project Insight 363 and TSC Tracker 9827
- Approval Items for This Week's e-Vote:
- Project Approval Request by the RCRIM WG of the DESD for Individual Case Safety Report (ICSR) Release 2 at Project Insight 1258 and TSC Tracker 9876
- Discussion topics:
- Dave/Karen looking for TSC input on the next stage of the ONC project - 15 minutes
- Dave and Karen submitted an initial report to the ONC which contained our proposed approach. This approach, along with open issues which we need TSC input on, has been copied to the following Wiki page (created a few months ago when they posed their original questions to the TSC). We’re asking the TSC to review the proposed approach on the page as ‘homework’, and feel free to edit the Wiki page with their feedback.
- Dave/Karen looking for TSC input on the next stage of the ONC project - 15 minutes
- Reports: (attach written reports below from Steering Divisions et al.)
- Open Issues List
Minutes
- Agenda review
- No items to add
- Approve Minutes of 2016-04-18 TSC Call Agenda
- Minutes accepted via general consent
- XML Vulnerability - Wayne
- Wayne states that last week the FHIR team discovered an XXE issue. It was decided to send out an announcement. Only affects implementations and is not part of the core standard. When one is using XML in FHIR, if you allow it to call out to a DTD, it could allow malicious issues/vulnerabilities. Published as an errata and posted on the FHIR website. Paul: It will affect anyone using XML - has nothing specific to do with FHIR. Impacts FHIR because we don't generally generate executables using XML, but reference implementations do. Should never reference outside of your own environment. Many FHIR XML representations did, however - but it is not the specification itself. Wayne: parting message is to let WGs be aware and be careful in the future. Austin mentions a similar issue in the past. Paul: when the XML committee reviewed these issues years ago, the clear guidance at that time is don't refer to stuff outside of yourself. With CSS, you have no choice. DTD processing should be turned off in production systems.
- Review action items –
- Followup on Project Approval request for the TSC project Revise Process to Withdraw Protocol Specifications
- ARB to add to agenda
- Melva to report back on Anesthesia move to Health Care Devices
- Followup on Project Approval request for the TSC project Revise Process to Withdraw Protocol Specifications
- Approval items from last week's e-vote referred for discussion:
- Updated 2016 PSS Template Review and Summary of Edits
- Referred by Wayne: Suggested changes here
- Reviewed document with Wayne's changes - Dave has already incorporated them. Discussion over Giorgio's comments regarding the Affiliate/US Realm approval section; confusion in 6.c. because it appears as Affiliate/US Realm with a parenthetical that only references US Realm. Paul suggests adding Affiliate to the parenthetical to clarify. Dave states that affiliates haven't used this section. Dave will remove the slash and replace it with an "or", or make it two sentences within the box. Melva wonders if that will complicate things since Affiliate approvals aren't usually used anyway. Suggestion to add Affiliate approval as its own line. Freida: wouldn't it be universal? Paul: That seems incongruous, that US specific things are US and everything else is universal. We'll possibly be seeing more European-specific standards. Melva: then those two lines should be separated. Discussion over if there will be a European affiliate or process for approving things for Europe; Paul reports there is a process. Wayne suggests a change to the way realm info is listed. Freida clarifies that the way it is organized is already known by the co-chairs and some of this is dictated by the way it is entered into Project Insight. Discussion over location of approval dates - do we organize by realm or dates? Melva wonders if cosponsor approval dates, currently in 2.b., should be moved to 6.c. Dave will look at the top section and see how to orchestrate that move. Melva mentions Wayne's comments regarding moving things that are optional (FHIR tasks) to a new section in 3.g. Melva explains why FHIR tasks are listed the way they are. Wayne suggests adding "if applicable." Freida suggests adding a bullet at the top. Further questions/discussion about whether or not the FHIR tasks are necessary. Dave states it is partly to educate people/remind them that resources and profile proposals need FMG approval. Lorraine: people forget to coordinate with the WG that owns the profile. Ken suggests we don't want to manage unique product line issues within the PSS. He suggests getting rid of those four rows. Paul agrees that we should simply send all FHIR projects over to FMG for review as we have been. Group agrees. Dave will update the document to remove those four lines. Section 3.i question on 1.1 release: Wayne suggests changing it to a post-release 1; Dave agrees. 3.m. backwards compatible - Wayne wondered if it should state the earliest prior version to which the compatibility applies. Paul states each family has different rules. Austin agrees it is family-dependent. Paul suggests adding a guideline for each of the families in appendix A. Freida agrees and wonders who will write it? Paul suggests asking the co-chairs of the management groups. InM is the management group for 2.x. Dave wonders if we can address the backwards compatibility section in the next template due to time constraints. Wayne is fine with that. Dave states Project Services will work to write up the request for the modification. Freida gives Dave kudos for figuring out the check boxes.
- MOTION by Freida to approve the template with suggested edits. Melva seconds.
- VOTE: All in favor
- Reviewed document with Wayne's changes - Dave has already incorporated them. Discussion over Giorgio's comments regarding the Affiliate/US Realm approval section; confusion in 6.c. because it appears as Affiliate/US Realm with a parenthetical that only references US Realm. Paul suggests adding Affiliate to the parenthetical to clarify. Dave states that affiliates haven't used this section. Dave will remove the slash and replace it with an "or", or make it two sentences within the box. Melva wonders if that will complicate things since Affiliate approvals aren't usually used anyway. Suggestion to add Affiliate approval as its own line. Freida: wouldn't it be universal? Paul: That seems incongruous, that US specific things are US and everything else is universal. We'll possibly be seeing more European-specific standards. Melva: then those two lines should be separated. Discussion over if there will be a European affiliate or process for approving things for Europe; Paul reports there is a process. Wayne suggests a change to the way realm info is listed. Freida clarifies that the way it is organized is already known by the co-chairs and some of this is dictated by the way it is entered into Project Insight. Discussion over location of approval dates - do we organize by realm or dates? Melva wonders if cosponsor approval dates, currently in 2.b., should be moved to 6.c. Dave will look at the top section and see how to orchestrate that move. Melva mentions Wayne's comments regarding moving things that are optional (FHIR tasks) to a new section in 3.g. Melva explains why FHIR tasks are listed the way they are. Wayne suggests adding "if applicable." Freida suggests adding a bullet at the top. Further questions/discussion about whether or not the FHIR tasks are necessary. Dave states it is partly to educate people/remind them that resources and profile proposals need FMG approval. Lorraine: people forget to coordinate with the WG that owns the profile. Ken suggests we don't want to manage unique product line issues within the PSS. He suggests getting rid of those four rows. Paul agrees that we should simply send all FHIR projects over to FMG for review as we have been. Group agrees. Dave will update the document to remove those four lines. Section 3.i question on 1.1 release: Wayne suggests changing it to a post-release 1; Dave agrees. 3.m. backwards compatible - Wayne wondered if it should state the earliest prior version to which the compatibility applies. Paul states each family has different rules. Austin agrees it is family-dependent. Paul suggests adding a guideline for each of the families in appendix A. Freida agrees and wonders who will write it? Paul suggests asking the co-chairs of the management groups. InM is the management group for 2.x. Dave wonders if we can address the backwards compatibility section in the next template due to time constraints. Wayne is fine with that. Dave states Project Services will work to write up the request for the modification. Freida gives Dave kudos for figuring out the check boxes.
- How best to communicate the PSS Updates in Montreal at Monday evening's Co-Chair dinner
- Dave previously presented at the co-chair dinner but suggests that Ken present them based on our earlier decision to make the co-chair dinner move along more quickly. Ken agrees. Dave will provide slides.
- Referred by Wayne: Suggested changes here
- Updated 2016 PSS Template Review and Summary of Edits
- Discussion topics:
- Dave/Karen looking for TSC input on the next stage of the ONC project - 15 minutes
- Dave and Karen submitted an initial report to the ONC which contained our proposed approach. This approach, along with open issues which we need TSC input on, has been copied to the following Wiki page (created a few months ago when they posed their original questions to the TSC). We’re asking the TSC to review the proposed approach on the page as ‘homework’, and feel free to edit the Wiki page with their feedback.
- http://hl7tsc.org/wiki/index.php?title=Questions_for_TSC_Regarding_the_ONC_Conformance_Testing_Project
- Dave reviews wiki page. Karen and Dave have submitted an initial report based on the last input from the TSC. Dave has added detail from that report to the wiki. There are nine items of proposed approach; seven of the nine items need input from TSC. Dave asks the group to read the nine items as homework and post responses on the wiki. Paul asks if this has gone to Conformance; Dave responds no but it will. They have engaged the WG in preparation for the report. Paul suggests seeing what their thoughts and recommendations are before we seal ours. John suggests inviting the Conformance co-chairs to comment on these wiki items. Ken asks if Dave will be in Montreal on Saturday; Dave will be there by Q4. Decision to add this discussion to Saturday Q4. Gora states he has regrets for Montreal.
- http://hl7tsc.org/wiki/index.php?title=Questions_for_TSC_Regarding_the_ONC_Conformance_Testing_Project
- Dave and Karen submitted an initial report to the ONC which contained our proposed approach. This approach, along with open issues which we need TSC input on, has been copied to the following Wiki page (created a few months ago when they posed their original questions to the TSC). We’re asking the TSC to review the proposed approach on the page as ‘homework’, and feel free to edit the Wiki page with their feedback.
- Dave/Karen looking for TSC input on the next stage of the ONC project - 15 minutes
- Adjourned at 11:58 pm Eastern
Next Steps
Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
| |||
| Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items |
© 2016 Health Level Seven® Inte
