2010-10-18 TSC Call Minutes

From HL7 TSC
Revision as of 18:07, 27 October 2010 by Llaakso (talk | contribs) (moved 2010-10-18 TSC Call Agenda to 2010-10-18 TSC Call Minutes: minutes approved)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

TSC Agenda/Minutes

Meeting Info/Attendees

HL7 TSC Meeting Minutes

Location:

Date: 2010-10-18
11 AM EDT
Facilitator: Charlie McCay Note taker(s): Lynn Laakso
Attendee Name Affiliation
x Calvin Beebe HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair
. Woody Beeler HL7 FTSD Co-Chair
x Bob Dolin HL7 Board Chair
. Tony Julian invited guest, HL7 FTSD
x Austin Kreisler HL7 DESD Co-Chair
x Lynn Laakso HL7 staff support
. Patrick Loyd invited guest, HL7 T3SD
x Ken McCaslin HL7 TSS SD Co-Chair
x Charlie McCay (chair) HL7 TSC Chair, Affiliate Representative
regrets Charlie Mead HL7 ArB Chair
x Ravi Natarajan HL7 Affiliate Representative
x Ron Parker HL7 ArB Alternate
x John Quinn HL7 CTO
regrets Gregg Seppala HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair
x Helen Stevens HL7 TSS SD Co-Chair
x Ed Tripp HL7 DESD Co-Chair
x D. Mead Walker HL7 FTSD Co-Chair
x Jay Zimmerman Ad-Hoc member
Quorum Requirements (Chair +5 with 2 SD Reps) Met: yes

Agenda

Agenda Topics

  1. Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests)
  2. Agenda review and approval - Charlie McCay
  3. Approve Minutes
  4. Review action items –
  5. To be scheduled in future telecons: followups from WGM -
  6. HL7 Chair or CEO Report – if available
  7. CTO Report - John Quinn
  8. ArB Report – Charlie Mead/Ron Parker
  9. Affiliates Report – Ravi Natarajan/ Charlie McCay
  10. Domain Experts Report– Austin Kreisler/Ed Tripp
  11. Foundation & Technology Report– Woody Beeler/Mead Walker
  12. Structure & Semantic Design Report– Calvin Beebe/Gregg Seppala
  13. Technical & Support Services Report- Ken McCaslin/ Helen Stevens
  14. Membership Comments on Steering Division Reports
  15. WGM Planning -
    • Marketing and promotion - update from HQ - ten WG confirmed not meeting: (AP, GAS, Arden, ASIG, Child Health, CCOW, FM, GovtProjects, II, RCRIM), and 5 WG not yet provided meeting room requests.
    • TSC preparations - Lynn Laakso - no update
    • Working Group preparations - agendas - no update
  16. Organizational Relations Committee update (semiweekly) - Helen Stevens
  17. Discussion Topics:


Supporting Documents

  1. http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/trackeritem/1673/7634/DSTU_Publication_Request_RPSr2.doc
  2. http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/trackeritem/1675/7644/ProjectScopeStatement_PC_Sept2010_R2_clean.doc
  3. http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/docmanfileversion/5913/7648/TSC_ProgramManagement.pdf


Minutes

Minutes/Conclusions Reached:

  1. Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests)
  2. Agenda review and approval - Charlie McCay – approved by general consent
  3. Approve Minutes – need another week to review WGM minutes
  4. Review action items –
    • EA IP
      • Action items: draft new project/program statement; close the alphas with structured interviews; set expectations for enterprise-wide reference implementation project; focus on requirements for that project.
      • Ed asks – alpha projects may decide to stop using SAIF framework and go back to standard methodology, is that acceptable? We should clarify that on the exit interview.
      • Mead suggests the projects have value regardless of methodology and will just take the alpha label off. Charlie says we’ll use the reference implementation to demonstrate the use of the SAIF-based foundational documents and the former alphas may or may not choose to proceed using SAIF-based ideas. Helen asks what will happen when they ballot their own rendition of SAIF based material – will it cause confusion at ballot time? Again, address this risk assessment in the exit interviews.
      • Ravi and Ken have joined the call.
      • Resourcing this effort; Austin suggests we advertise on the HL7 website for volunteer positions for those skills. Program management is at a higher level than project management. Program management deals with a larger initiative, having multiple project managers to coordinate in a business structure. With the alphas it was too much on a project by project basis to note dependencies between projects. With a number of different projects contributing to a strategic objective, need to keep an overview among the activities.
      • Ravi asks if this is something picked up from the Board. Charlie notes it was identified at the Board, too many activities to manage with having a project with co-sponsors as every one of the Foundations Work Groups. Bob notes that with the budget for 2011, to advance this program management we’d have to choose something else to ‘not’ do to retain resources to advance this.
      • Charlie notes that the opportunity for people to volunteer to take program management roles is of value to HL7. If we’re looking to HL7 stakeholders to invest in HL7 this is also a way they can advance interests by providing some program management. Need visibility on efforts to stakeholders, need visibility to our efforts in relation to the strategic initiatives, etc. Bob wonders what are the ten critical tasks of the EA IP. He further notes that the EA IP is core TSC business, need to lay out a framework to introduce this new initiative. He correlates the introduction of the NHS SMD tool, and managing that change to the organization.
      • Updates at http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=EA_IP#Implementation_Plans
  5. To be scheduled in future telecons: followups from WGM -
  6. HL7 Chair or CEO Report – Bob reports the Board approved the Strategic Initiative Criteria as well as the maintenance process.
  7. CTO Report - John Quinn: Returned from ISO meeting last week with Chuck Jaffe, tracking down a couple of issues.
  8. ArB Report –Ron Parker: Involved with the EA IP realization – if we can project to the community the ability to organize under some higher level goals it might minimize turf wars.
  9. Affiliates Report – Ravi Natarajan: no report.
  10. Domain Experts Report– Austin Kreisler/Ed Tripp
    • Motion: to approve the Request to Publish DSTU for RCRIM: Regulated Product Submission Release 2, for 18 months. See TSC Tracker # 1673, Project Insight # 217.
      • balloted in January, worked through reconciliation package. There is a Phase 3 requirements gathering process so this particular content won’t go normative without another round of DSTU balloting. Outstanding negatives represented at reconciliation and have not gotten around to formally withdrawing.
      • Vote: unanimously approved.
    • Motion: to approve the Project Scope Statement for Patient Care - Care Provision DIM and Care Statement R2. See TSC Tracker # 1675, Project Insight # 672.
      • Jay asks if in the memo from Nictiz the comment existed that there were requirements not met. It was stated that they should advance the missing requirements before advancing it to normative. Austin says we will need to have a project representative to address that question. Jay notes that there’s nothing in the project material and scope to indicate that the work was done. Downstream affects to classes have not been addressed, is Nictiz happy with the potential results of advancing this DSTU? Jay will draft a question for Nictiz or project representatives to address. Should approval be conditional on Nictiz being happy with the recommendations in the memo? Ken and Austin disagree.
      • Vote: unanimously approved.
    • Straw poll in Domain Experts, of 11 respondents six are meeting and five not meeting. Government Projects and AP had not participated in the DESD poll (see agenda item on HQ marketing). Ed will likely not be there and Austin may not be able to get funding. Charlie notes we need an attendance poll for the TSC members. Jay can cede his ad-hoc position with assuming his Affiliate role in January and we can elect another ad-hoc (TSC can only have one ad-hoc member at a time).
  11. Foundation & Technology Report–Mead Walker says they are meeting tomorrow.
  12. Structure & Semantic Design Report– Calvin Beebe reports they have nothing this week.
  13. Technical & Support Services Report- Ken McCaslin reports they have a work group with travel problems and have elected an acting cochair.
  14. WGM Planning -
    • Marketing and promotion - update from HQ - ten WG confirmed not meeting: (AP, GAS, Arden, ASIG, Child Health, CCOW, FM, GovtProjects, II, RCRIM), and 5 WG not yet provided meeting room requests.
    • TSC preparations - Lynn Laakso - no update
    • Working Group preparations - agendas - no update – keeping it for Cambridge for now as Lynn’s using the links to gather DMP and M&C references then will update for January
  15. Organizational Relations Committee update (semiweekly) - Helen Stevens: Board suggested to approach the International Council with the Statement Of Understanding approach proposed by ORC to transition all agreements to SOU. Asking Steering Divisions to review if Work Groups think they have agreements from outside organizations against the list on the ORC wiki. Charlie also reports we need to work with ORC on obtaining liaison reports from the Board to use for the Sunday Q4 session. Helen will check with Bob and coordinate with Karen. She’d like to see it on the Wiki. Charlie notes that we need to be sensitive to the authors they understand if their audience is Board or general membership.
  16. Discussion Topics:
    • "What are our key projects" decision making process
      • John to report via email this week and we’ll discuss next week.
    • Status of DCM developments at ISO
      • Discussion on ISO project being split into two and a third strand identified for quality attributes and processes as ISO project and HL7 project to identify modeling and structure. This would be a program pulling together entry level models. Carry forward discussion to next week.
    • Listserv email: HL7 urgent need for program management
    • Open Issues List

Adjourned at 12:02 PM.

Next Steps

Actions
  • Jay will draft a question to Nictiz on the downstream effects to classes which have not been addressed, is Nictiz happy with the potential results of advancing this DSTU?
  • we need an attendance poll for the TSC members
  • work with ORC on obtaining liaison reports from the Board to use for the Sunday Q4 session. Helen will check with Bob and coordinate with Karen.
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items
  1. Approve WGM minutes
  2. "What are our key projects" decision making process
  3. Status of DCM developments at ISO
Retrieved from "https://tscwiki.hl7.org/w/index.php?title=2010-10-18_TSC_Call_Minutes&oldid=7196"