2015-06-29 TSC Call Agenda

From HL7 TSC
Jump to navigation Jump to search

TSC Agenda/Minutes

Meeting Info/Attendees

Standing Conference Calls

TSC will hold a Conference Call at 11AM Eastern time, each Monday except during scheduled face-to-face Working Group Meetings unless otherwise noted at TSC_Minutes_and_Agendas.

GoToMeeting at https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/426505829 using VOIP
For those without access to microphone/speakers:
US: +1 (224)501-3318
Canada: +1 (647)497-9379
Italy: +39 0 230 57 81 80
Access Code: 426-505-829
GoToMeeting ID: 426-505-829
HL7 TSC Meeting Minutes

Location: call 770-657-9270 using code 985371#
NEW GoToMeeting ID: 426-505-829

'Date: 2015-06-29
Time: 11:00 AM U.S. Eastern
Facilitator: Ken McCaslin Note taker(s): Anne Wizauer
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 John Quinn x Lorraine Constable x Giorgio Cangioli .
Domain Experts Foundation and Technology Structure and Semantic Design Technical and Support Services
x Melva Peters Regrets Woody Beeler x Calvin Beebe . Freida Hall
x John Roberts x Paul Knapp Regrets Pat van Dyke Regrets Andy Stechishin
. Russ Hamm . .
ex officio Invited Guests Observers HL7 Staff
. Stan Huff (HL7 Chair) w/vote Lloyd McKenzie . obs1 x Anne Wizauer
. Chuck Jaffe (CEO) vote . . . obs2 .

. . . . .



  1. Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests)
    • Lloyd McKenzie - Review list of items that are being transitioned to FHIR Infrastructure WG and FHIR Core WG - 20 minutes
  2. Agenda review and approval -
  3. Approve Minutes of 2015-06-22 TSC Call Agenda


  1. Approval items:
  2. Discussion topics:


  1. Review action items
  2. Approval items:
  3. Discussion topics:
    • Referencing External Materials (Paul/Andy) - 20 minutes
  4. Reports: (attach written reports below from Steering Divisions et al.)
  5. Open Issues List


  • Meeting minutes accepted via general consent.
  • Paul on Referencing External documents: 2 types – documents that come to us from an external body looking for endorsement or cobranding. The other type is a document or spec that we have chosen to ballot that may have supporting materials which are part of the normative content that are not housed wholly within the realm of our responsibility. TRAC discussed this recently and we are going to further that discussion on the 9th. The key aspect is that there is coverage in the GOM for how one ballots docs from other organizations – we either ballot it as our own or someone comes for an endorsement. In that case it goes to HQ and then we ballot it with an endorsement. In the case of Melva’s issue, there are certain times when people would like us to simply “bless” the document, and that is not really covered by the GOM. It is different than an endorsement; it is more of a recognition. There is a business side, though, of this activity. There may be charges, for example. We’ll be able to come forward later in July with a draft modification to the GOM and a rationale for TSC to review. Ken: Anne to add to agenda for the 20th. Ken: do SOUs cover this, or do they need to be expanded? Do we really need a GOM change? Paul: This is different in class of recognition than a ballot or an endorsement – this is a recognition. Calvin: Is it like a certification stamp of approval? Is there only one route to asserting something about an outside product? Paul: it’s not about products, it’s about specifications. If we put our name on it, it must not be altered and we may have to be a publication site for it. Ken: should these things go to the board? Paul: I think the process should perhaps be reviewed but the decision process could stop at the TSC. Will do followup on 7/20.
  • Lloyd McKenzie here to discuss what will not be owned by FIWG. Lloyd reviews the list that was created on the FGB call two weeks ago. Comments:
    • We will need to bring EST in on the loop of what’s where and what the processes are so they can look to longer term management of publication tooling. Discussion over marketing with HL7s logo on it and the approval process involved. Lloyd states near term they will increase involvement with EST and publication WGs and look to revisit ownership in May 2016.
    • Ken: Should public engagement channels be integrated with the help desk area? Lloyd: intention is that support for implementer community is free. Should never have to be an HL7 member in order to successfully implement the FHIR spec. Paul: but we could have FHIR information available without going through the member filter. Lloyd: the material in the HL7 FAQ is intended to be a member benefit.
    • FHIR.org will be managed by a group that has significant representation from HL7.org, but will also have membership outside of that. FHIR.org is an organization with a legal entity managing it, not just a website. Paul: that is at odds with what Chuck told us last week. Lloyd: intention is that there is a separate organization affiliated with HL7 but is not under the sole control of HL7 that would provide support to the implementer community.
    • Ken: Should Connectathons have a relationship with the Education WG? Lloyd: there is a liaison with Education from FMG (David Hay). Melva notes we need stronger involvement from FHIR as it is being done completely separate from the rest of Education. Will schedule a discussion between Education and FMG in the next month or so to increase coordination.
    • First gap: FHIR.org misunderstanding – John Q. will circle back with Chuck. Second gap: Education – meeting will be scheduled with EST and Education.
  • Paul: Mary Kay McDaniel is preparing an overview on SGB for newsletter; timeline in the article reads that during the summer the SGB will be recommended to the Board, then announced in September, and then first formal meeting in January. Paul wonders if they could begin meeting earlier than that – formed in September/October, meet in October. Does it need to go to the Board since it’s being driven by SAIF? Lorraine: we should at least keep the Board informed. John Q. agrees that it could be in the CTO report. Melva: will there be GOM changes? John Q.: those would go to the EC for approval. MOTION by Paul to recommend that the SGB assemble and have their first kickoff meeting in October. Second by Calvin: VOTE: all in favor.
  • Call adjourned at 12:00

Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
  • Anne to add referencing external documents discussion to 7/20 agenda
  • John Q. to touch base with Chuck regarding conflicting FHIR.org information
  • Paul to recommend that SGB assemble and have first meeting in October
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items

© 2015 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.