2009-08-10 TSC Call Minutes

TSC - Technical Steering Committee

Monday, August 10, 2009 11:00 AM (US Eastern Time, GMT -5)
To participate, dial 770-657-9270 and enter pass code 124466#
GoToMeeting at https://www.gotomeeting.com/join/165215206
GoToMeeting ID: 165-215-206 

back to TSC Minutes and Agendas

Agenda

Apologies

• Calvin Beebe

Meeting Admin

Roll Call - The following individuals joined the call:

At	Name	Affiliation	Email Address
	Calvin Beebe	HL7 SSD SD	cbeebe@mayo.edu
x	Woody Beeler	HL7 FTSD	woody@beelers.com
	Jim Case	HL7 Ad-Hoc	jtcase@ucdavis.edu
x	Marc Koehn	HL7 EA IP PM	marc.koehn@gpinformatics.com
	John Koisch	HL7 ArB	jkoisch@guidewirearchitecture.com
x	Austin Kreisler	HL7 DESD	austin.j.kreisler@saic.com
x	Lynn Laakso (scribe)	HL7 HQ	lynn@hl7.org
x	Ken McCaslin	HL7 TSS SD	Kenneth.H.McCaslin@QuestDiagnostics.com
x	Charlie McCay (chair)	HL7 TSC Chair	charlie@ramseysystems.co.uk
x	Charlie Mead	HL7 ArB	Charlie.mead@booz.com
x	Ravi Natarajan	HL7 Affiliate	Ravi.Natarajan@nhs.net
x	John Quinn	HL7 CTO	jquinn@hl7.org
x	Gregg Seppala	HL7 SSD SD	gregg.seppala@va.gov
x	Ioana Singureanu	HL7 FTSD	ioana@eversolve.com
x	Helen Stevens Love	HL7 TSS SD	helen.stevens@shaw.ca
x	Ed Tripp	HL7 DESD	Edward.tripp@estripp.com

1. Accept Agenda – agenda accepted
2. Approve Minutes from 2009-08-03_TSC_Call_Minutes –unanimously approved
3. Review action items –
   • Action Item from 2009-08-03 TSC Call Minutes: McCay to contact Patient Care and find out when they intend to attend, and ask them to bring a proposal for making the DCM activity more visible, and how they’d like to see the consistency issues addressed. Charlie continue his action item to next week

Standing Committee Reports/Approvals

1. CEO Report – none available
2. CTO Report: RFP process down to couple of finalists after a couple days in the HL7 HQ office last week. Working with finance committee on proposed budget to board for consideration in September. Received notice from people on ONC standards advisory board on AAFP, Google Microsoft on replacing CCD with CDA. John, Chuck, Bob preparing a formal response. FHA formally delisted CCR a year ago, but issue now coming up again. Ioana asks if the SAEAF materials on the ArB site are the current material? Tech writer and graphic artist will be working on making them more digestible but the content is there. This is the stable R1. Looking at putting it in publishing tool like DITA.
   • EA IP Update: Marc Koehn.
     • Correspondence last week significant. Biggest challenge is that alpha projects are our key initiative, and the three candidates we’ve been working with (PASS CTS2, and Structured Documents) are joined by at least one project from NCI and a project from HER. Projects have progressed but have not submitted a charter to outline and formalize a scope and timelines. We had hoped that Atlanta would provide content discussions but seems that it may serve yet to reveal how to apply SAEAF to their discussions. Charlie Mead said that NCI is implementing a CTS2 project that will be informed by SAEAF so what is the problem with the CTS2 project. Marc says Russ and Craig have not gotten back to him on the project. Charlie Mead says Apelon has officially stopped working on CTS2. NCI has formally approved CTS2 as a project to work with II4SM with Alan Honey and Jobst. John Quinn asks should Karen be contacting Alan instead of Russ? Russ may contract with II4SM. Alan creating PIM for OMG submission as starting point. Marc will contact him to follow up.
     • Charlie Mead reports that it has launched an enterprise architecture specification project as a customer, rather than a developer. Charlie offers the link to anyone who is interested. McCay suggests sending it to the TSC list.
3. ArB Report – Charlie Mead says last week’s meeting was planning for Traverse City. ArB is heads-down working under the notion that upon leaving Traverse City they will be able to identify who is available to do what in Atlanta for hands-on help to the alpha projects. They have a good idea on how to do SAEAF in a services world, but messages and documents not so clear. Using the specification stack at NCI and finding it helpful, will provide their feedback to date. John Quinn adds that there are discussions on DAMS and whether they are normative. Ioana stated that the HDF was revised and if they have additional changes in the context of SAEAF they should look at it.
4. Affiliates Report – no report
5. Domain Experts – Austin reports:
   • Patient Care did not join us today.
   • ANSI standard approaching 5-year anniversary; HL7 Version 3 Standard: Notifiable Condition Report, R1. TSC Tracker # 1100. PHER not interested in creating a project to keep this going, so standard will lapse. Work was originally done by RCRIM but domain is Patient Safety now under PHER. We don’t know if anyone is using it. Originally developed for CDC but did they did not end up using it. Like HL7 2.2 or 2.1, although those standards have lapsed, it does not prevent anyone from using them. Consequence would be that it is no longer published with the normative edition; falls off the HL7 web page? We still list the V2.2 standard but not as an ANSI standard. The TSC acknowledges that the standard will be allowed to lapse.
   • For TSC awareness - ANSI reaffirmation ballot: Despite the fact that ANSI reviewed and approved our procedures, they will not approve the reaffirmation of the Annotated ECG because there is one outstanding negative and they want that to be re-circulated and the negative voter advised of his right to appeal. So, we need to schedule an “emergency” re-circulation ballot. The GOM needs to be changed and that committee has already been apprised
     • ANSI reaffirmation ballot: an affirmation ballot should not be open to comment, just yeah or nay, how did this come to be? Even with the one negative, there should have been sufficient affirmative representation to still pass the ballot, why will ANSI not accept? Action item:John will talk to Karen. Move remaining discussion to listserv.
6. Foundation & Technology – nothing to report.
7. Structure & Semantic Design – nothing to report
8. Technical & Support Services – nothing to report. Meeting today.

Discussion topics

TSC Tracker 999: TSC Product Visibility Project

• Next Steps:
  1. Request the TSC approve HL7 Wiki Draft Product List in order to send the Product Brief templates to the appropriate work groups to fill out.
     • CTS as service under health information exchange
     • EHR Lifecycle FM under func specs/ check with wg
     • SAEAF and HDF under modeling
     • Implementation guides as a category and pulled out and listed as a section as well as under the products; high level on front page, but detailed list drill into from front page. V3 IGs, V2 IGs. V3 summary page hides subsections under v3, then a page that has all items under v3. Implementation guides as a product under health information exchange standards after messaging, documents and services.
     • Each release under V3 also an independent product.
     • Implementation guides as products
     • Other products? HDF; 2.x implementation guides; what about releases of the RIM, do the ITS need to reference a certain release of the RIM.
     • V3 is a product category with each of the “releases” are the individual products and have cross links. Things in the foundation are referenced elsewhere like RIM and CTS. Woody suggests call it product “package”, and the releases are products. Foundation stuff should be its own product category like but separate from v3 messaging
     • Practical guide to SOA referenced in HDF, can remove
  2. Send out Product Brief template to all steward/custodian Work Groups to fill in
  3. Publish Product List
• See task list on Project Insight for details
• Also inviting feedback on draft matrix on domains.

Charlie redirects due to time constraints, out of time

Open Issues List

• Closing issue due to lack of traction - TSC Tracker 1001: TSC Large Customer Partnerships Project Proposal

Adjourn 12:01 PM EDT

Review next week

• TSC Tracker 1082:provide a structure and format guideline for three year plans to the WGs, now tied to PS WG project to clean up Project Insight. See Pilot project report example
  • Project Services requested enhancement to web site planned for December release - add to each Work Group web page, a tab for "Projects" that will provide the filtered view for that Work Group's projects, which will include their three-year plan items from Project Insight.
• PSS at TSC Tracker 998: TSC Project Visibility Proposal
• PSSat TSC Tracker 997: TSC Work Group Visibility project proposal