2016-06-06 TSC Call Agenda

From HL7 TSC
Revision as of 22:28, 7 June 2016 by Anne wizauer (talk | contribs) (→‎Agenda)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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

GoToMeeting ID: 426-505-829

Date: 2016-06-06
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 . Lorraine Constable x 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
. Melva Peters . Russ Hamm x Calvin Beebe x Andy Stechishin
x John Roberts x Paul Knapp x Gora Datta . Sandra Stuart
. . . .
ex officio Invited Guests Observers HL7 Staff
. Pat Van Dyke (HL7 Chair) w/vote x Rick Grow x Tonya McKennley x Anne Wizauer
. Chuck Jaffe (CEO) vote . . . obs2 .


. . . . .

Agenda

Housekeeping

  1. Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests)
  2. Agenda review and approval -
  3. Approve Minutes of 2016-05-23 TSC Call Agenda
  4. Review action items – 15 minutes
    • TSC Nomination Committee (John, Calvin, Russ, and Sandy) to recruit nominees for open positions
    • Update to Publication Request template (due to GOM change request for naming) - Freida
    • Rewrite motion(s) on substantive change from 2016-05-08_TSC_WGM_Agenda and rewrite to clarify that the definition does not only apply to normative
    • Begin work on multi-year planning items discussed at WGM:
      • Simplification of location of meeting notifications, minutes, agendas, and other documentation: Melva, Jean
      • Evaluate WG/SD structure: Melva, John, Russ
      • Evaluate opportunities for member/non-member engagement: John, Lorraine, Russ w/Anne assisting
      • Standards organization hierarchy: John
      • Standards sharing across realms: Jean, Giorgio
      • Standardization of processes across WGs: Sandy, Melva, Ken, Tony, w/Anne assisting
      • Strategy for PSS management throughout the lifecycle: Jean, Dalvin, Dave, EST
  5. Approval Items Referred for Discussion:
    • Project Approval Request by the CQI WG of the DESD of Common Clinical Registry Framework Domain Analysis Model at Project Insight TBD and TSC Tracker 10051
      • T3SD: Marked universal, but US centric
      • DESD: 6.d should have local and state departments of health selected; PHER will be in contact re: co-sponsorship
      • ARB: We have balloted business requirements for registries in 2013: This should be taken into account for this effort
    • Project Approval Request by the Clinical Genomics WG of the DESD for Clinical Genomics DAM at Project Insight 1254 and TSC Tracker 10052
      • Wayne: would like the group to also explicitly examine overlaps with the NCI Life Sciences DAM that’s included in BRIDG v4
    • Project Approval Request by the CBCC WG of the DESD of Privacy Impact Assessment Cookbook at Project Insight 1058 and TSC Tracker 10054
      • T3SD: Needs a publishing facilitator if doing a September ballot
      • ARB: This effort defines a process, not a standard
      • Wayne: Line 4 in scope “will necessitate” seems to be imparting policy prematurely before the document is completed. I’d rather decide whether this must be enforced or just a guideline once work is completed. I’m OK with that as a goal, but not an enforced requirement yet.
      • Austin: Referred without written comment
    • Project Approval Request by the Structured Docs WG of the SSD-SD of C-CDA R2.1 Companion Guide at Project Insight TBD and TSC Tracker 10116
      • T3SD: Marked as universal but as it applies to C-CDA which is a US Realm standard. I believe the USRTF should review this PSS.
      • Austin: Since this IG is pretty clearly driven by US requirements, it should be marked as a US Realm specific project. As such, it hasn’t been approved by the US Realm Steering Committee. The project is also being funded by ONC.
    • Project Approval Request by the SOA WG of the FTSD of Privacy, Access and Security Services (PASS) Healthcare Audit Services Conceptual Model at Project Insight 1264 and TSC Tracker 10108
      • Wayne: Risk includes: Ensure resources included on this project who are familiar with FHIR/Restful requirements. Maintain an open line of communication with FHIR resource/requirement developers. Ensure deliverables are reviewed by FHIR resource/requirement developers. So should FMG co-sponsor?
    • Project Approval Request from the Patient Care WG of the DESD for Allergy and Intolerance Substance Value Set(s)Definition Informative Document at Project Insight TBD and TSC Tracker 10110
      • Freida: Last objective in Section 3g is: Publish value sets to VSAC (Value Set Authority Center sponsored by the National Library of Medicine). Is this in addition to publishing in the HL7 Master Grid?
      • Austin: The PSS is missing a Product type (section 4) and The specific Realm(section 6.b) - Anne researched and found that the product type is Vocab domains and value sets and V2-infrastructure. Domain is US with hopes to make international at a later time.
    • Unballoted DSTU Update Publication Request by the CDS WG of the SSD-SD of HL7 Standard: Clinical Quality Language Specification, Release 1.1 at Project Insight 1108 and TSC Tracker 10115
      • Freida: Question for TSC: we don’t have a family name applicable to Clinical Decision Support in naming conventions, should we add?
  6. Approval items from 2016-05-23 e-vote approved 4/0/1 with T3SD, DESD, ARB, Wayne, and Austin voting:
  7. Approval items from 2016-05-23 e-vote approved 5/0/0 with T3SD, DESD, ARB, Wayne, and Austin voting:
  8. Approval items from 2016-06-01 e-vote approved 5/0/0 with T3SD, DESD, Freida, Wayne, and Austin voting:
  9. Approval items for this week:
  10. Discussion topics:
    • FluentPath Publication and Licensing (Andy)
    • Process to Withdraw Protocol Specifications:
      • EST/Staff to determine where retired standards will reside
      • ARB to investigate what to do with joint standards
  11. Reports: (attach written reports below from Steering Divisions et al.)
  12. Open Issues List
    • Wayne to present TSC principles on endorsements to EC
    • Substantive change:
      • Consult with Karen/Freida to determine the best place(s) to post the new definition and socialize
      • Austin to carry forth the definition to SGB for support/policy guidance

Minutes

  1. Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests)
    • Rick Grow here to discuss Privacy Assessment Cookbook
  2. Agenda review and approval -
    • Agenda approved
  3. Approve Minutes of 2016-05-23 TSC Call Agenda
    • Approved via general consent
  4. Review action items – 15 minutes
    • TSC Nomination Committee (John, Calvin, Russ, and Sandy) to recruit nominees for open positions
      • Will be put on agenda for weekly update. John: Group hasn't met but we'll set something up.
    • Update to Publication Request template (due to GOM change request for naming) - Freida
      • Used to be a line for balloted name and publication name. Took that line out for publication name as we want the name to be determined during the balloting process. Also removed the section to register an informative document with ANSI. Ken asks SDs to inform their WGs of the changes so they don't use the outdated form; tell them to grab the newest version of the template from the website.
    • Rewrite motion(s) on substantive change from 2016-05-08_TSC_WGM_Agenda and rewrite to clarify that the definition does not only apply to normative
      • ACTION: Add to next week
    • Begin work on multi-year planning items discussed at WGM:
      • Groups should start scheduling calls to discuss.
  5. Approval Items Referred for Discussion:
    • Project Approval Request by the CIC WG of the DESD of Common Clinical Registry Framework Domain Analysis Model at Project Insight TBD and TSC Tracker 10051
      • T3SD: Marked universal, but US centric
      • DESD: 6.d should have local and state departments of health selected; PHER will be in contact re: co-sponsorship
      • ARB: We have balloted business requirements for registries in 2013: This should be taken into account for this effort
        • John Roberts will go back to the CIC WG with issues
    • Project Approval Request by the Clinical Genomics WG of the DESD for Clinical Genomics DAM at Project Insight 1254 and TSC Tracker 10052
      • Wayne: would like the group to also explicitly examine overlaps with the NCI Life Sciences DAM that’s included in BRIDG v4
        • MOTION to approve PSS with the stipulation that they include a statement that they will examine BRIDG v4 for possible overlaps by Wayne. Second by John.
        • VOTE: All in favor
        • ACTION: Anne to communicate to co-chairs
    • Project Approval Request by the CBCC WG of the DESD of Privacy Impact Assessment Cookbook at Project Insight 1058 and TSC Tracker 10054
      • T3SD: Needs a publishing facilitator if doing a September ballot
      • ARB: This effort defines a process, not a standard
      • Wayne: Line 4 in scope “will necessitate” seems to be imparting policy prematurely before the document is completed. I’d rather decide whether this must be enforced or just a guideline once work is completed. I’m OK with that as a goal, but not an enforced requirement yet.
      • Austin: Referred without written comment
        • Rick Grow here to discuss. Austin: Trying to enforce governance without going through SGB. Wayne: Same comment as I had. Rick: Idea is that it would be more of a guide, not something binding on HL7 to do as a requirement. Not intending to be a standard. Up to individual standards developers to follow the instructions and guidelines if they so choose. Wayne: Sounds fine but it's not worded that way. John: any applicability outside the HL7 community? Should this be an informative standard? Freida: The TSC asked project services to craft a procedure for introducing new processes into HL7. Calls for a process to vet the subject through a comment ballot or a peer review so the community knows that it's available. Then the TSC declares if it's endorsed, recommended, or required. Ken: There needs to be some adjustment to the way the project is described. Rick: Will modify the language to reflect and send back to WG, SD, and then TSC for review.
    • Project Approval Request by the Structured Docs WG of the SSD-SD of C-CDA R2.1 Companion Guide at Project Insight TBD and TSC Tracker 10116
      • T3SD: Marked as universal but as it applies to C-CDA which is a US Realm standard. I believe the USRTF should review this PSS.
      • Austin: Since this IG is pretty clearly driven by US requirements, it should be marked as a US Realm specific project. As such, it hasn’t been approved by the US Realm Steering Committee. The project is also being funded by ONC.
        • Calvin: We'll adjust it and get it to US Realm
    • Project Approval Request by the SOA WG of the FTSD of Privacy, Access and Security Services (PASS) Healthcare Audit Services Conceptual Model at Project Insight 1264 and TSC Tracker 10108
      • Wayne: Risk includes: Ensure resources included on this project who are familiar with FHIR/Restful requirements. Maintain an open line of communication with FHIR resource/requirement developers. Ensure deliverables are reviewed by FHIR resource/requirement developers. So should FMG co-sponsor?
        • Paul: FHIR would have had the opportunity to raise that already if they felt it was missing. Typically FMG isn't a cosponsor of PSSes it reviews. Since they reviewed it, it doesn't need to be explicit in the PSS. Question whether or not it has FHIR approved.
        • ACTION: Paul to determine if FMG has reviewed.
    • Project Approval Request from the Patient Care WG of the DESD for Allergy and Intolerance Substance Value Set(s)Definition Informative Document at Project Insight TBD and TSC Tracker 10110
      • Freida: Last objective in Section 3g is: Publish value sets to VSAC (Value Set Authority Center sponsored by the National Library of Medicine). Is this in addition to publishing in the HL7 Master Grid? - Anne followed up and the group responded yes. Freida reports there are difficulty getting value sets published. This is only the second time she can remember where we publish just a value set. Anne reports it would be the informative document plus the value sets in VSAC. Freida reports that last time it was a headache for Lynn. Will it be a word document? How will they publish it?
        • ACTION: Anne to follow up and get PSS updated
      • Austin: The PSS is missing a Product type (section 4) and The specific Realm(section 6.b) - Anne researched and found that the product type is Vocab domains and value sets and V2-infrastructure. Domain is US with hopes to make international at a later time.
        • MOTION by Freida to approve with followup action item by Anne to enquire on what they plan to publish for the value sets. Second by Austin.
        • VOTE: all in favor
    • Unballoted DSTU Update Publication Request by the CDS WG of the SSD-SD of HL7 Standard: Clinical Quality Language Specification, Release 1.1 at Project Insight 1108 and TSC Tracker 10115
      • Freida: Question for TSC: we don’t have a family name applicable to Clinical Decision Support in naming conventions, should we add?
        • Paul: is it a family, or is it a domain? Is it cross-paradigm specification?
          • ACTION: Calvin to go back to WG to ask if they would be okay calling this a cross-paradigm specification
  6. Approval items from 2016-05-23 e-vote approved 4/0/1 with T3SD, DESD, ARB, Wayne, and Austin voting:
  7. Approval items from 2016-05-23 e-vote approved 5/0/0 with T3SD, DESD, ARB, Wayne, and Austin voting:
  8. Approval items from 2016-06-01 e-vote approved 5/0/0 with T3SD, DESD, Austin, Freida, and Wayne voting:
  9. Approval items for this week:
  10. Discussion topics:
    • FluentPath Publication and Licensing (Andy)
      • ITS was requested to bring this forward to TSC because FluentPath would like to adopt some of the practices that are using in FHIR, but there's no way to specify that. They'd like to be using the FHIR license for the publication. They'd also like the publication to be at a fixed point so it can be easily referred to from other publications such as FHIR. HL7.org/publications/fluentpath, for example. What is available at that fixed point would be discussed later. The third item is that they wanted to follow the FHIR practices for releasing. Paul: FluentPath is again a cross-paradigm. Being applied directly to both V3 and FHIR families. Raises an interesting situation from a publication perspective. Can they request publication under one family's sets of rules? Ken: if we publish it under FHIR, what's the issue that you see? Paul: from a licensing perspective it's available to everyone immediately rather than having the 90 day hold, and in V3 it is created and static thereafter. Andy: it might be built in FHIR but it would be delivered as a stand-alone thing, not part of FHIR. Paul: we have no mechanisms or rules around making this choice. FHIR rebuilds each time - how do we ensure consistency? Ken: We do republish under FHIR and if we put FluentPath under FHIR as far as licensing and publishing, what is the risk with V3 trying to be static and FHIR trying to keep things moving forward? Paul: It's not a V3 vs. FHIR thing, it's a within FHIR things. Once you publish it, how do you ensure each subsequent publication is the same? Andy: If we set this thing up at a certain point, once we accept the materials they will remain until we replace them. Paul: As long as its external from FHIR. Andy: It is external from FHIR. It's a stand-alone, distinct thing. Is just informative at this point. Would like to do DSTU in September ballot and want to get this ironed out now. Ken: I don't see an issue if it's under the FHIR license. Still part of HL7. Wayne: It's quite simple. Publishing something in the manner FHIR publishes doesn't mean it's part of FHIR. Paul: This is kicking the door open and we need to consider under what circumstances we want this to be used. Wayne: I can take this to EC; we could make a motion that we would allow this under an approval basis. Is this a voting issue for TSC? Andy: Having the TSC vote on it lends weight to the decision for when it goes to the EC. Paul: What does it mean to publish it under FHIR publishing? Tooling to create the publication but not part of spec? Who is putting it there and who maintains it over time?
        • ACTION: Wayne to explore licensing issue with EC
        • ACTION: Paul to ask FHIR and Publishing what the publishing process would look like
        • ACTION: Anne to add to 6/20 with Paul, Andy and Wayne assigned
  11. Adjourned. Wayne chairing next week in Ken's absence.

Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
  • .
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items


© 2016 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.

Retrieved from "https://tscwiki.hl7.org/w/index.php?title=2016-06-06_TSC_Call_Agenda&oldid=17210"