2012-05-14 TSC WGM SDO Activities Minutes
Contents
TSC Monday Q3 Agenda - 2012 May WGM Vancouver, BC CAN
back to TSC Minutes and Agendas
to JIC Projects page
to ISO_and_JIC_projects wiki page
TSC HL7 activities with other SDOs Meeting Location: Port McNeill Room |
Date: 2012-05-14 Time: Monday Q3 | ||
Facilitator | Austin Kreisler | Note taker(s) | Lynn Laakso |
Opportunity for HL7 WGM attendees to review activities in collaboration with other SDOs such as IHE, OMG, and the JWG and JIC, and provide comment. | |||
Attendees:
|
Agenda
Welcome and Introduction - Scott Robertson
- Continue discussions from Sunday afternoon
- Plan for next WGM:
Comment period
Minutes
Scott convenes the group at 1:50 PM Liaison reports - managed by ORC
- Quick - when possible attached in minutes, up to a page, make it easy for others to find and track down more information on what you're working on.
- Major project status
- Review status of MOU
Discussion/Panel/Presentation
- People
- Topic
- Julie had suggested ballot scheduling, such as HL7 OOC ballots to coordinate with other SDOs- Scott notes that NCPDP, for example, doesn't do out of cycle ballots. It would be nice if there were fewer ballots. Ballot processes between SDOs might be a bit of education. CEN, ISO, ASTM/X12. Robert notes you want people that have experience with multiple ballot SDOs.
- Question raised on difference to JIC. HL7 has joint projects with many SDOs; JIC can be part of it or be hosting it as TSC and ORC do now. Doug reports that JIC is doing some ballot coordination. We might learn about what JIC is doing and offer input into it. Robert reports that we could take the JIC coordination further and show people how coordination occurs. John Quinn as an HL7 representative to JIC he's very interested in this point. Lisa Spellman of US TAG has been faced with a battle coming up to speed. Mary Kay notes that people need to understand why it is complex, and why we need to care. Justifying why one needs to come to the meetings each WGM can be aided by demonstrating what one learns about what the other SDOs are doing.
- JIC as entry point can illustrate both ballot procedure, and process/development.
- Julie asks if we can use a specific problem to illustrate what we're trying to solve.
- Doug asks if there's a sense of the MOUs we have out there. Scott reports that there is a page on the wiki that has a list of organizations, MOUs, and liaisons. He'll be updating that list today. Mary Kay reports that those MOUs are really important to justifying their membership with HL7. Liaison reports are therefore important to be able to share what they've learned from these contacts to communicate the value of membership.
- Mary Kay notes that Giorgio's presentation on epSOS especially on lessons learned were extremely valuable and she'll be using that reference. Scott notes that some of their examples are relevant between the U.S. states.
Scott will ask for a quarter like this for the next session, as we may anticipate some more rollover into another session; and in planning for the next session this quarter's feedback and input are very helpful.
Julie asks about the ORC. They meet next quarter, and are responsible for maintaining the SOUs which were formerly referred to as MOUs. The ORC while being a Board committee has latitude in its membership so just check in with Scott to join. There is a TSC liaison (Ed Tripp), and Don Mon as ex officio. Chuck Meyer, Helen Stevens, and Klaus Veil are members according to the website. Karen is staff support and Chuck Jaffe is ex officio.
- Sue wants to find out what's expected in a liaison report. What are the active projects with HL7 and a one liner for status, new developments in their organization that are of interest to HL7 membership. Mary Kay notes experience with coordinating with X12 behind the scenes and the importance of the role of the liaison. Sue adds that as part of PStack and MTM they've gotten many new SNOMED codes.
- Scott notes that the other organizations with which we have liaisons may not be associated with specific projects.
- Doug notes that with the importance of these issues a 1 ½ hour meeting three times a year is not enough. It may not be the right vehicle to answer the questions suggested. Does the group need to consider improving how we work with the other SDOs beyond liaison reports? Is that within the charge of this particular group? Scott recalls the humble beginnings of the Activities with Other SDOs group. Joint efforts and joint understanding can be worked into some active coordination and action plan to produce something; that would be a wonderful output. Robert asks how do people in individual work groups find out what areas of interest and linkage are happening in other SDOs? Scott notes there is opportunity for inter-SDO knowledge at an individual level - having an idea and bringing it forward to broader consideration. Robert adds that JWG meetings were useful to talk about what was happening in one SDO and how the other SDOs can help with that. If we're not careful we may lose that.
- Passive receipt of information is not the best use of people's time, but active dialogue would help. All SDOs might be coming with their ballot schedule and actively coordinating various cycle times to bring forward for decision points. One must address dependencies between SDOs on what is coming to CDISC first, for example. JIC has been more effective than SCO for example as they have a more passive reporting structure. A collective decision or action as the objective of a meeting is an effective driver. Vocabulary bindings are difficult but not enough representation from IHTSDO to move things forward.
- Robert notes another tangible item might be in sharing experiences in doing the balloting - should we propose do the balloting in one place only and what would need to be changed to accomplish that? Each organization does its own ballot and may suggest referring to another SDO's ballot material but does not streamline the balloting process.
- Richard notes that finding the time for people who have the experience to come on the Sunday and compete with other scheduled items such as the FHIR sessions is difficult.