2014-01-19 TSC WGM Minutes

From HL7 TSC
Revision as of 19:15, 10 February 2014 by Llaakso (talk | contribs) (moved 2014-01-19 TSC WGM Agenda to 2014-01-19 TSC WGM Minutes)
(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


Date: 2014-01-19
Time: 5:15 PM U.S. Eastern
Facilitator: Ken McCaslin Note taker(s): Lynn Laakso
Quorum = chair + 5 including 2 SD represented yes/no
Chair/CTO ArB International Affiliate Rep Ad-Hoc
x Ken McCaslin x Tony Julian x Jean Duteau x Austin Kreisler
x John Quinn regrets Lorraine Constable x Giorgio Cangioli .
Domain Experts Foundation and Technology Structure and Semantic Design Technical and Support Services
x Melva Peters x Woody Beeler x Calvin Beebe x Freida Hall
x John Roberts regrets Paul Knapp x Pat van Dyke x Andy Stechishin
ex officio Invited Guests Observers HL7 Staff
. Don Mon (HL7 Chair) w/vote x Heather Grain x Katherine Duteau x Lynn Laakso
. (Vice Chair) vote x Ron Parker x Rene Spronk .
. Chuck Jaffe (CEO) vote x Lloyd McKenzie x Hugh Glover. x Julie James Glover


  1. HL7 Terminology Authority (Heather Grain)
  2. ArB
    • BAM-lite
    • SAIF-CD Glossary
    • ArB change to ARB
  3. FGB
    • Leadership
    • Next steps
  4. FMG
    • DSTU issue reporting plans


Minutes/Conclusions Reached:
called to order 5:20 PM

  1. HL7 Terminology Authority (Heather Grain) - she describes her slides though projector was not available
    • Principles of operation suggested - use cases and listing known issues
      • Terminology content principle - using external terminology if exists
        • Freida asks about HL7 internal tables; Woody cautions that we frequently update some small structural tables and migrating them into SNOMED would be disruptive. There are other areas that might benefit.
        • Jean notes that if we have existing internal codes can we also include the external tables and develop a path for migration.
        • Ron suggests that some codes rely upon clinical content for triggers e.g. Acts, but with act-act relationships that are RIM-based and HL7-architectural and not related to data in flight. Data inherent to flow of data with health service delivery those are ideal candidates to consider.
        • Opportunities to have national extensions to the IHTSDO set discussed.
        • Calvin asks about Omaha in SNOMED with nurses, and EMTs e.g. DEEDS and NEMSIS. Clinical niche areas are of concern for domains having existing specifications.
        • Woody asks about licensing impediments for some countries in use of SNOMED - all have access to the terminology now. He'd like to look at the impacts to harmonization process in March.
        • suggested wording of you "shall consider" use of external terminology, not that you "shall" use the external terminology
      • Vocabulary facilitator principle - harmonization efforts are done through a vocab facilitator
        • Not really a change : already in place but reiterating the practice. They were looking at current procedures to review and will ensure they are updated and develop new procedures as needed. Austin notes that procedures that impact the Working Group have to be run through the TSC so they are proceeding correctly. If the TSC endorsed these principles, for instance, they could instruct Harmonization to enforce the "SNOMED Rule".
        • Heather notes they are planning on working with Harmonization on process, how to get facilitators educated, how to obtain facilitators for those WGs that don't have them, streamlining harmonization for proposals already reviewed by the HTA. Woody did not recognize the invitations to the meetings so has not been attending. He will try to attend this week. Friday Q1 he cannot attend as he's at FGB.
      • the concerns raised are not foreign to the HTA
  2. Action Item: Karen reports that Don did not think the ISO ballot process would work but he will look into it.
  3. ArB - there is a presentation
    • BAM-lite: ArB working through BAM-lite, through first 5 chapters. Very challenging but expect to distribute before next WGM
    • Finalizing the SAIF-CD Glossary and harmonizing with the BAM and will be available in PDF and OWL for Protégé.
    • ArB change to ARB - they would like to be full fledged ARB with a capital R - Motion by Freida and second by Austin; feedback and information for changes to the GOM are needed. Calvin asks what the changes to the mission and charter and scope of the ArB would be - it's really no change just to specifically include Review in the GOM. Calvin asks if this changes how the ArB is constituted. Membership may have to change for composition to suit the review function. Vote: Unanimously approved.
      • Current constitution of ArB in GOM is fairly strictly defined and they would like more flexibility in calling for expertise on artifact review. Ad hoc membership is not allowed and membership is only by TSC appointment. Jean notes that ArB can invite non-members to participate under the trial membership clause. Woody notes that it would disenfranchise potential members to be invited in to do work but not get a vote.
      • Calvin asks about review of the varied product families and having the appropriate members with expertise in the product families. 09.03.01 is cited. Woody notes that over time they would like to consider the invited participants for voting membership. Ron adds that this is done now.
  4. FGB
    • Ron reports that it was voted to go forward with publication of the DSTU with discussion of revisions and approach to updates to the DSTU reviewed. Further versioning must be explicitly clear. Ron has some revisions to Lloyds warning statement on the "Attention Implementers" document. It was identified that we need to explicitly define what we mean by DSTU and its lack of immutability as with other DSTU that have been reference in regulation. Calvin cautions that capital letters may not be enough. Ron cautions that delay to make updates to the standard before publishing the DSTU will not be tolerated by the resources that would be needed. Calvin reiterates that it will be cited in regulation and when we make substantive change it will cause problems.
      • Andy recounts discussion with Lloyd on perception differences on meaning of DSTU and you can only do as much as you can. Jean notes also another US Agency that generating problems on datatypes R2B like the FDA. Woody points out that we can submit public comment on the proposed regulation and even hire a lawyer to write the objection for us to point out how they are "illegally" referencing a draft standard and cannot be held to refrain from breaking change. ONC may indeed be trying to remain flexible on the standard that is referenced.
      • Ken notes he and John will be meeting with ONC before the Board meeting and will discuss.
      • Motion: Austin moves to endorse the approach described for publishing the FHIR DSTU, seconded by Andy. The request to publish will be coming and the TSC will vote to approve that at a later time. Vote: Unanimously approved.
      • Ken notes that there may be contract issues with post-publication access to accepting comments from the public. The contract may even allow us to make the DSTU immediately available and not wait the three months for members-only. DSTU comments have been proposed to use GForge for tracker as a public access which also needs to be checked in the contract. Woody asks for a consideration to maintain some of those comments on the DSTUComments site as well. Austin notes they have requirements that exceed the ability of dstucomments page like notifications.
  5. a letter of appreciation is offered to Austin
    • FGB Leadership - Ron is resigning as chair. Ron is thanked for his contributions as FGB chair and also as ArB chair.
    • Ratification of the M&C - - new communities of representation on FGB for vendor and provider stakeholders. Jean asks if they considered governmental representatives. Another change is relationship to FMG and change to cochairs elected from within the group. Jean further asks if they are appointed by TSC or recommended - both statements are true, the CTO makes recommendations to the TSC and the TSC appoints.

Adjourned at 6:31 PM

Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
  • .
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items

© 2014 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.