2009-06-01 TSC Call Minutes

From HL7 TSC
Revision as of 17:16, 1 June 2009 by Llaakso (talk | contribs) (→‎Agenda)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

TSC - Technical Steering Committee

Monday, June 1, 2009 11:00 AM (US Eastern Daylight 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



  • Chair: Charlie McCay
  • CTO: John Quinn
  • Domain Experts: Austin Kreisler (primary), Ed Tripp (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: Ravi Natarajan
  • ARB: Charlie Mead (primary), John Koisch (alternate)
  • Ad-Hoc: Jim Case
  • HQ: Lynn Laakso


  • Charles Jaffe (CEO)
  • Ed Hammond (HL7 Chair); Bob Dolin (HL7 Vice Chair)
  • Marc Koehn (EA IP)
  • Karen Van Hentenryck (HQ)


  • Ken McCaslin
  • Ed Tripp

Charlie Mead John Koisch


  1. (5 min) Meeting Admin
    • Roll Call - The following individuals joined the call:
Name Affiliation Email Address
Woody Beeler HL7 woody@beelers.com
Bob Dolin HL7 BobDolin@gmail.com
Austin Kreisler HL7 austin.j.kreisler@saic.com
Lynn Laakso (scribe) HL7 lynn@hl7.org
Charlie McCay (chair) HL7 charlie@ramseysystems.co.uk
Ravi Natarajan HL7 Ravi.Natarajan@nhs.net
John Quinn HL7 jquinn@hl7.org
Gregg Seppala HL7 gregg.seppala@va.gov
Amnon Shabo HL7 SHABO@il.ibm.com
Ioana Singureanu HL7 ioana@eversolve.com
Helen Stevens Love HL7 helen.stevens@shaw.ca
  1. (20 min) Standing Committee Reports/Approvals
    1. CEO Report -
    2. CTO Report - see attachment
      • EA IP Update
        • Marc reports:In terms of progress, we have been focusing on pushing the Alpha candidates to get their charters completed as a key next steps to kick-start the next set of conversations. The PASS folks will be using the SOA meetings in Chicago to shape their draft; CDA R3 requested assistance which Lynn and I are trying to provide; the others (NCI and CTS2) are still thinking through their responses.
        • We will also be trying to push the overall EA work forward with the advisory group, being mindful of TSC guidance from the Saturday and Sunday mtgs.
    3. ArB Report – no report
    4. Affiliates Report – Ravi identified some RIM harmonization proposals that had been accepted but were not reflected in the published RIM. Do we need better ‘visibility’ on proposal tracking to closure? Woody reports that there is a ‘trial’ database published within 10 days of harmonization for review so that missing items could be identified. This item is outstanding from 2006 and was not reported until now, so this CONC item will be addressed by MnM.
    5. Domain Experts -
      • Project Approval Request: PORR DAM for Patient Safety at TSC Tracker #1054. Unanimously approved
      • Request to Publish Informative Document for PHER: TB DAM, TSC Tracker # 1057. Unanimously approved with proviso to include date DAM provided to HQ. Unanimously approved
      • DESD Kyoto WGM discussion – there was a desire to develop a standard representation/format for the three year plans so an expected amount of detail can be presented and gleaned. It should not be a “make-work” project, but should at least be intelligible. This does not seem to be an issue unique to the DESD, but it needs to be something that both meets the needs of the TSC and Board as well as the DESD.
        • Motion: The TSC provide a structure and format guideline for three year plans to the WGs that describes the content detail required for their own project guidance and decision making processes.
        • Discussion: how much time do we want the cochairs doing administration, rather than dealing with content. Ioana suggests that that the information in Project Insight (PI) be used on the premise that they must enter their future projects also be added to Project Insight. The idea is to relieve the cochairs from the administrative step of taking the information out of PI. Austin adds that DESD has tasks and other activities that are not project-oriented, not related to Project Insight. This is why the request occurs to provide guidance for the work groups. Woody and Austin will assist Lynn in drafting something.
        • Motion tabled by Austin until next week
      • Some work groups need clarification on the recent deadline for new project submissions for the September ballot cycle. There are work groups in DESD and other steering divisions that are drafting new project proposals as we speak on the assumption that these projects can still be added in time for the Sept. ballot. Was May 24th a real deadline or not? If not, why do we call it a deadline, and what is the real deadline? If May 24th was a real deadline we need to clearly and unambiguously communicate that fact to the co-chairs and HL7 membership. In addition, it seems that those late projects would not be eligible for inclusion in the Sept. ballot.
        • Discussion: Woody indicates intent to ballot needs to be allowed for Publishing. Project approvals start in the Steering Division, but the publishing deadline is more of a TSC rule. New items need to start the project by deadline so that content is ready for ballot. Is the 24th a hard deadline for new projects for the September ballot – will the TSC accept new PSS intended for September? If not, what is the actual deadline? Workgroups with work in process need to have a PSS approved prior to the NIB – this is to provide readiness. Ioana recounts PMO needs notification by May 24 whether or not a PSS is approved. PSS must absolutely be approved by NIB date. Helen asks: in recognizing all the things that have dependencies, what is the reasonable deadline? If people are still working on stuff past the deadline, is it going to the January cycle, or isn’t it? The NIB is a genuine deadline. Charlie suggests there should be clear instruction to the cochairs. Can we streamline the approval process to minimize that effort, Helen asks. Austin suggests that we can send a clear message by rejecting projects if they come in late.
        • Motion:Austin moved to accept the TSC position based on Ioana's suggestion- that the TSC provide official notification for clarification - that the project scope statement, as approved by the work group, must be submitted to the PMO and steering division by that date. Helen seconds. Unanimously Approved
      • DESD has approved Wendell Ocasio as the steering division representative to the ArB.
    6. Foundation & Technology -
      • proposed RASCI (Responsible, Accountable, Supportive, Consulted, Informed) chart discussion to manage the apparent overlap between various work groups and projects in our Steering Division: Draft RASCI chart. We would like to propose the approach and a first draft chart. In view of great upcoming changes, it may be useful to use RASCI charts for the entire organization collaboratively with the work groups to identify the responsibilities and interests of various stakeholder. A RASCI chart approach may be used for other new, cross-cutting activities initiated by the TSC.
        • not discussed in Kyoto, FTSD did not have quorum last week. Ioana has left the call, so table to next week.
    7. Structure & Semantic Design -
      • Project Approval: Clinical Genomics - Project Proposal (attachment) on Genetic Testing Reports (tabled from 2009-03-30, 04-06), see PSS at TSC Tracker # 917. Unanimously approved.
      • Request to publish DSTU for Clinical Decision Support: V3 Infobutton, TSC Tracker # 1058. Unanimously approved.
    8. Technical & Support Services -
  2. (30 min) Discussion topics
    • Review and discuss Work Group Health documents, and determine a plan to agree what the metrics should be in the spreadsheets, and what we show on the Monday evening cochairs meeting in Atlanta
      • Next week’s call, take a look at the document and check the column headings to identify if we should distribute these as they exist, for distribution. Plan to show a version of them at the Monday evening cochairs meeting at the Plenary.
    • TSC Product Visibility Project (TSC Tracker #999 ) and draft wiki page
      • Draft pages on TSC Wiki - move to HL7 Wiki?
      • High-level list approved by TSC (like ballot document titles)
      • Need to include dependencies, such as Datatypes (not currently listed as a product)
      • Woody recommends using the function in wiki for categories, searching by ‘TSC Product’

Adjourned at 12:00 PM.

Future Agenda item list

Click for TSC Action Item List