2012-09-12 V3 Datatypes Task Force
first meeting, Constellation E, 2012Sep WGM
Woody, Charlie cochairs
- Austin Kreisler,
- Mead Walker,
- Hugh Glover
- John Quinn,
- Ron Parker
- Paul Knapp
- Lloyd McKenzie
- Pat van Dyke
Scribe: Lynn Laakso Definition of wire-format backwards compatibility discussed.
More of a business and political problem than a technical problem. Woody notes it is also a technical problem, in the implications to all the implementations
Lloyd asks for scope and mandate of this group. Need a recommendation for the V3 Modeling to the TSC.
John notes that the Board said last night that the TSC needs to come up with a definition of releases and how that relates to backwards compatibility for all products, going forward. Not necessarily applying backwards at this time. Woody notes the policy is in the V3 Normative edition which was just published, and has been in there for all its iterations.
Lloyd notes that MU references ISO Datatypes 21090 specifically in Quality Measures. Discussion ensued on whether that reference was deliberate or editorial. Paul feels it's deliberate and surprising that no one brought it up before now. The R1 of that standard uses Datatypes 1.1 but the earlier version was informative and the current release is DSTU.
Woody asks if the exogenous adoption of ISO datatypes in the affiliate community; it was not discussed at the International Council. It's used by CRO certainly notes Charlie. Woody says that means we can't abandon a path to R2. What are the management problems imposed by forking, and what are the marketing problems. He further asks if the ITSs talk about the various releases. Paul says R1.1 expresses Datatypes of R1 backwards compatible to wire format plus non-breaking changes. R2 is R1.1 plus breaking changes.
Mead suggests you can publish RMIMs using Abstract DT R2 and publish schemas using R1.1. You produce two sets of schemas but not two sets of diagrams or ballot packages.