2016-05-08 TSC WGM Agenda

From HL7 TSC
Jump to navigation Jump to search

TSC Saturday meeting for Montreal WGM

back to TSC Minutes and Agendas

TSC WGM Agenda/Minutes

HL7 TSC Meeting Minutes


Date: 2016-05-08
Time: 5:15 pm Eastern
Facilitator: Ken McCaslin Note taker(s): Anne Wizauer
Attendee Name Affiliation
x Calvin Beebe HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair
Regrets Woody Beeler TSC Member Emeritus
x Giorgio Cangioli HL7 Affiliate Representative
x Lorraine Constable HL7 ARB Co-Chair
Regrets Gora Datta HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair
x Jean Duteau HL7 Affiliate Representative
Regrets Freida Hall Adhoc Member - GOM Expert
x Russ Hamm HL7 FTSD Co-chair
? Stan Huff HL7 Immediate Past Board Chair (member ex officio w/ vote)
? Chuck Jaffe HL7 CEO (member ex officio w/o vote)
x Tony Julian HL7 ARB Co-Chair
Regrets Paul Knapp HL7 FTSD Co-Chair
x Austin Kreisler Adhoc Member
Regrets Wayne Kubick HL7 CTO (TSC member ex officio w/vote)
x Ken McCaslin (Chair)
x Anne Wizauer(scribe, non-voting) HL7 HQ
x Melva Peters HL7 DESD Co-Chair
x John Roberts HL7 DESD Co-chair
Regrets Andy Stechishin HL7 T3SD Co-Chair
x Sandra Stuart HL7 T3SD Co-Chair
? Pat Van Dyke HL7 Board Chair (member ex officio w/ vote)
x Mary Kay McDaniel
x Katherine Duteau
x Dave Hamill
x Lloyd McKenzie
Quorum Requirements (Co-chair +5 with 2 SD Reps) Met: (yes/No)

Agenda Topics

  1. Reminder: Anne to distribute evaluations
  2. FHIR
  3. Report on HQ change from DSTU to STU - Lynn
  4. Revise Process to Withdraw Protocol Specifications
  5. Good implementation practices - Wayne, Lorraine


  • Agenda Review
    • Agenda accepted
  • FHIR - Lloyd McKenzie present to report on FHIR.
    • 120 people at Connectathon this week. Expecting more in Baltimore. May incorporate video broadcast again in the future.
    • Working towards going to ballot this summer. Working with WGs to prioritize tasks. Solicited feedback from implementer community.
    • PSS meandering its way around to evaluate alternatives to Gforge. May look at whether we will test it with the next ballot depending on timeline of PSS approval. Will make sure there is training in advance.
    • More and more FHIR activity happening here and elsewhere
    • Josh just sent out a FHIR maturity survey and Lloyd sent out some clarifying information as well. 38 responses on the survey so far. Lloyd would like to see the top 20 be at FMM3.
    • Ken delivers feedback that he heard that Connectathon was spread thin with sometimes only two people at a table. Lloyd: We are aware of the issue and are working on it. One problem is people not declaring what they’re interested in. Could prune down the number of tracks, but that could be disappointing to many attendees. Will be discussing solutions over the next several weeks. Could potentially do a better job forcing people to sign up for the desired track so we know better what people are interested in. Often people don’t sign up until Saturday morning, or they sign up for five tracks but only participate in one. Could also put a caveat in the registration that we don’t guarantee enough participation in a given track to hold it.
  • Report on HQ change from DSTU to STU – Lynn
    • Lynn not ready to present until further input from Tamara
  • Revise Process to Withdraw Protocol Specifications

 **ARB Recommendations

      • Tony reviews ARB recommendations. ARB proposes that we recognize three types of standards: HL7 Standards, HL7 ANSI registered standards, and HL7 retired standards. Retired standards should be available, but not on the list of active standards. We are already doing this for DSTU/STU. HQ has to remove the ANSI watermark, and we need to determine how they would be marked.
        • MOTION that HL7 standards that are withdrawn should be retired, available, but not on the list of active standards. Calvin seconds.
        • Discussion: Austin states we have a handful of standards that have been balloted through ISO. Is that a fourth category? Calvin: They have their own lifecycle. There are edge cases that don’t neatly fit. There CDA standard that was at ISO too. Tony states they will take this on as another thing to investigate – what to do with joint standards. Austin states the three categories listed should state that it’s three categories applying to ANSI. Ken asks if there would be another grid of retired standards? Tony says that is not part of the recommendation; we’ll let our technical people figure out how to do it. Lorraine: For STUs we have a link to the list of expired ones, but whatever makes sense to Tamara/EST can be explored.
        • VOTE: Sandy abstains. Remaining in favor.
          • ACTION: EST and staff to determine where retired standards will reside.
          • ACTION: ARB to investigate what to do with joint standards
  • Tony reviews ARB recommendation on substantive change
    • Discussion over differences between HL7 ER and ANSI definitions.
    • Why did we add to the ANSI definition? Discussion over the word “materially” and if we should change it to “directly.”
      • MOTION by Tony that the substantive change definition is “During ballot reconciliation, any change that meets the ANSI substantive change definition is to be considered an HL7 substantive change. Examples of HL7 substantive changes are: altering the information content of an instance, the circumstances under which it would be sent, or the interpretation of its content. Any substantive change shall necessitate a subsequent normative ballot of the same content; allowing the consensus group [§02.04.04] to respond, reaffirm, or change their vote due to the substantive change” Second by Calvin.
      • VOTE: All in favor
      • MOTION that this be placed in a permanent place on the HL7 website as directed by the TSC by Jean. Second by Calvin. Amendment by Lorraine that we consult with Karen and Freida to determine the best place to post the new definition. Austin: the definition should also apply to STU and informatives, so perhaps the primary place for it is not in the HL7 Essential Requirements. Need clarification from Karen. Lorraine suggests that we seek advice from Freida and Karen on how to achieve our stated goal.
      • VOTE: All in favor
    • We will need to socialize this after feedback from Karen and Freida. Will approach the conversation tomorrow night.
    • Mary Kay: Standards Governance Board could provide support and policy.
      • ACTION: Austin will carry forth to SGB.
  • Good implementation practices - Wayne, Lorraine
    • Move to future agenda
  • Adjourned at 5:15 PM Eastern
Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
  • .
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items
  • .