Meeting-20080113

From HL7 TSC
Revision as of 13:15, 31 January 2008 by Karenvan (talk | contribs) (→‎Agenda)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

TSC - Technical Steering Committee

Sunday, January 13th, 2008 5:00 PM (US Central 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

Contents [hide] 1 Attendance 1.1 Expected 1.2 invited 1.3 Apologies 2 Agenda 3 Agenda item list (our sand box for future meetings) 4 Click for TSC Action Item List

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: Charlie Mead
  • HQ: Karen Van Hentenryck

invited

  • Charles Jaffe (CEO); Ed Hammond (HL7 Chair); Chuck Meyer (HL7 Vice Chair)

Apologies

None

Agenda

  1. Meeting Admin
    1. Roll Call - Quorum was established with the following participants in attendance: Gregg Seppala, Calvin Beebe, Frank Oemig, Jim Case, Austin Kreisler, Charlie McCay, John Quinn, Ed Hammond, Ken McCaslin, Chuck Meyer, Woody Beeler, Ioana Singureanu, Helen Stevens Love, Karen Van Hentenryck
    2. Accept Agenda - The agenda was approved.
  2. Vote to accept new ARB composition John Quinn presented the proposed ARB slate: Rene Spronk, Ron Parker, Grahame Grieve, Tony Julian, John Koisch, Nancy Orvis, Abdul-Malik Shakir, Mead Walker, Cecil Lynch, Yongjian Bao (V2, V3 messaging, and vocab). MOTION by Case: To approve the proposed TSC slate; seconded by McCaslin. Motion carried unanimously. Issue: Jim Case suggested that at some time, the TSC address issue of getting quorum on SD votes.
  3. 2008 Objectives - McCay reviewed the current list of 2008 TSC objectives in preparation for the TSC report on Monday evening, to the membership during the Tuesday morning session and during the Tuesday Board meeting.
    • TSC reporting and communication processes
    • Establish effective ARB and Project Services Committees
    • Clarify roles/responsibilities
      • Organizational structure of SIGs/TCs into work groups
    • Issues management/tracking
    • Make real the HL7 products and services strategy
      • Improve ballot quality
  4. SDO Collaboration - Hammond reported that as it relates to the ISO/CEN/HL7 joint work that HL7 needs to continue to meet its objectives. He suggested that the TSC explore pathways for allowing HL7 standards to be distributed to the broader community. Hammond also raised the issue of keeping the RIM up to date and in synch as it exists in ISO and HL7. The ISO version of the RIM is out of date. Beeler noted that ISO didn’t object to the RIM content; the objections were related to non-substantive issues/items. There was a suggestion that HL7 re-ballot the RIM and invite ISO to participate in that ballot. Beeler noted there will be pressure to include the whole RIM, not just the backbone (the RIM ISO ballot was constrained to the backbone). If we think this will be problematic, we might consider splitting the RIM into two documents. It would be ideal if ISO/CEN would support our maintenance process through harmonization. Beeler noted that HL7 decided many years ago not to re-ballot the RIM every year. HL7 might consider balloting the RIM every other year or at some other defined interval? We might consider open a ballot effective in March on the current RIM (omitting all but the core) to ballot only those changes since last ballot and see if t passes. We could run a second ballot on the communications portion of the RIM. Hammond will suggest the various strategies with the JIC. Hammond reported that there are currently three joint projects: (1) Data Elements, (2) ICSR, (3) IDPM. Questions have been raised regarding the number of joint projects that can undertaken without derailing HL7’s own plans. Quinn is working on the process for bringing these projects into HL7. Meyer asked about the IHE and how this fits into the discussion of SDO collaboration. Hammond reported that the IHE is becoming a legal entity that might be a standards organization. Should that be the case, we will need to collaborate with them.HL7 has joined the IHE as an organizational member and we will work our the terms of the MOU once they have sorted out the legal issues. The group discussed several suggestions for the terms that might outlined and/or addressed in the MOU and will discuss them again at a later time.
  5. Issue management - Singureanu, Wilfred Bonney, Charlie McCay and K. Van Hentenryck will meet during the WGM to discuss some of the issues that need to be resolved.
  6. Products & Services Strategy- McCay reported that Jaffe has requested a TSC representative, in addition to John Quinn to serve on the roadmap committee. Once the criteria for serving on this committee is defined and shared with the TSC we can move forward with identifying a representative.
  7. TSC Communications Plan - McCay reviewed the current list of Communications from the TSC as published on the wiki. A technical newsletter was suggested this morning at the affiliate meetings. It would be ideal to publish this document interim to the working group meetings. ACTION ITEM: Stevens-Love and Van Hentenryck will to coordinate on this effort. Regarding projects, the project lifecycle team is piloting the Project Insight tool. Quinn reported on the last TSC meeting that the goal is to have all projects charters moved over to Project Insight by May. The types of questions that we need to answer are which group is working on a particular specification, what its open issue are, how to get involved, etc. The ability to look across the organization to identify the projects being worked on, their projected ballot dates, etc. is essential TSC should also track those committee that are not publishing agendas and minutes, with SD co-chairs communicating with their groups that minutes and agendas are expected by ANSI and critical to the information flow of the organization. ACTION ITEM: Invite Sherold Barr and Jill Kaufman to participate in upcoming TSC call to assist with communications
  8. Planning for TSC and SD meetings on Monday evening - Van Hentenryck reported that two items have been added to the agenda since the last TSC meeting – (1) an NLM project update from Ted Klein (2) a harmonization report from Woody Beeler
  9. Criteria for out-of-cycle balloting - The TSC will carry this item forward. Quinn took an action item during the last TSC call to draft criteria for out-of-cycle ballots. He has not yet distributed any draft procedures so we will carry this item forward. Hammond also noted that he’d forgotten during the ISO discussion that we will need to determine how to coordinate ballots with the JIC.
  10. Roles and responsibilities - This topic will require a lot of discussion and thus it was deferred to a later date.
  11. Project Services Committee approval - McCaslin noted that in the past, committee charters were approved by the ARB and he asked if that was still the case. This is no longer the case as the TSC is the body that now makes the decision. Regarding the project services committee, Freida Hall has volunteered to chair this committee. MOTION by McCaslin: To accept the project services mission and charter; seconded by Singureanu. Discussion: Kreisler noted that we are asking committees to fill lots of roles (e.g., publishing facilitator, editing facilitator and now a project management facilitator). The issue is that the proposed content of the committee calls for a PM facilitator from each of the work groups. The motion passed unanimously.
  12. Ballot Publishing quality (and IBM proposal) - Beeler noted that issues around ballot quality have little to do with publishing processes. They have more to do with the content that is submitted (i.e. incomplete, incorrect, etc). Regarding the IBM engine, Beeler reported that it is a backend engine (i.e., it creates a web site from submitted content). The challenge will be that the proposal involves a fairly large contribution that will not solve the problems publishing has had around tooling. The Publishing committee will identify and bring the issues forward. Beeler suggested that we can immediately improve things by publishing a definitive list of flaws once they are detected, not two weeks following the ballot publication.
  13. Work group formation and dissolution - Case saw a couple of typos in the committee dissolution process that he will forward to Van Hentenryck but other than those, he is pleased with the proposed process. Kreisler noted that process does not cover involuntary committee dissolutions. Involuntary dissolutions will be covered as a separate issue under committee maintenance. Under items 4 and 5, we should indicate that these are instructions to HQ for how their content should be archived or moved. MOTION by McCaslin: To approve the committee dissolution process; seconded by Beeler. Beeler noted the idea is not to add more work groups but to create projects within the current work groups. The motion passed with four in favor, one against, and one abstention. MOTION by Case: To approve the new work group approval process; seconded by McCaslin. Motion passed unanimously.
  14. May WGM agenda - For May WGM, the TSC will meet on Sunday from 5-8 pm. ACTION ITEM: VanHentenryck to request that dinner be provided. Will also meet Wed for lunch.

The meeting adjourned at 7:55 pm CT

Retrieved from "https://tscwiki.hl7.org/w/index.php?title=Meeting-20080113&oldid=2833"