2016-10-24 TSC Call Agenda

From HL7 TSC
Revision as of 21:00, 25 October 2016 by Anne wizauer (talk | contribs) (→‎Agenda)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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: GoToMeeting ID: 426-505-829

Date: 2016-10-24
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 Austin Kreisler
x Wayne Kubick x Lorraine Constable x Giorgio Cangioli x Freida Hall, GOM Expert
. . . . Woody Beeler, TSC Member Emeritus
Domain Experts Foundation and Technology Structure and Semantic Design Technical and Support Services
x Melva Peters x Russ Hamm x Calvin Beebe x Andy Stechishin
x John Roberts x Paul Knapp x Gora Datta Regrets Sandra Stuart
. . . .
ex officio Invited Guests Observers HL7 Staff
. Pat Van Dyke (HL7 Chair) w/vote . . obs1 . Anne Wizauer
. Chuck Jaffe (CEO) vote . . . obs2 .


. . . . .

Agenda

Housekeeping

  1. Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests)
  2. Agenda review and approval -
  3. Approve Minutes of 2016-10-17 TSC Call Agenda
  4. Review action items –
    • John Roberts waiting for WG clarity on the issues with Project Approval Request by the Patient Care WG of the DESD of Definition of Negation Requirements for Standards at Project Insight TBD and TSC Tracker 12197 – white paper, SAIF conceptual model, or informative document?
    • Tony will check with Brian on the communications plan for the potential change to V2 proposal submissions from web site to GForge.
    • Anne to make adjustments to STU publication request document and put in Update from TSC
    • Anne to touch base with WG and Lynn on the issue of International realm participation in Infobutton project
      • Response from WG: Infobutton is not US-based. There is no reason that infobutton functionality would be useful only in the US. In fact, there are implementations abroad (I attached a paper as an example), including some initiatives for national implementations in Europe and US-based EHR vendors that also sell their products abroad. On the publishing side, several implementers include content in multiple languages, such as MedlinePlus and Healthwise.
  5. Approval items from last week's e-vote referred for discussion:
  6. Approval items from last week's e-vote approved 6/0/0 with Jean, T3SD, ARB, Giorgio, FTSD, and Freida voting:
  7. Approval items for this week:
  8. Discussion topics:
    • Initial report from SGB and ARB on addressing the issue of separation of concerns
    • Report from Paul, Calvin, Melva on requirements for logging issues/comments across standards
    • Continue TSC SWOT Review
    • Revisit PSS for "Revise Process to Withdraw Protocol Specifications"
      • TSC reviewed/did not approve because of the following concerns: 1) lack of project facilitator; 2) no co-sponsor approvals. Ken will talk to Dave about being the facilitator. Andy will coordinate with publishing and PIC regarding cosponsoring. ARB will add to their agenda as well.
      • Original issue was CCOW but once that was resolved the issue lost steam
  9. Open Issues List

Minutes

  • Agenda review and approval -
    • Agenda complete
  • Approve Minutes of 2016-10-17 TSC Call Agenda
    • Approved via general consent
  • Review action items –
    • John Roberts waiting for WG clarity on the issues with Project Approval Request by the Patient Care WG of the DESD of Definition of Negation Requirements for Standards at Project Insight TBD and TSC Tracker 12197 – white paper, SAIF conceptual model, or informative document?
    • Tony will check with Brian on the communications plan for the potential change to V2 proposal submissions from web site to GForge.
      • Ken had reached out during Tony's vacation. They are working on a PSS so this action item can be closed.
    • Anne to make adjustments to STU publication request document and put in Update from TSC
      • Anne to add link to next week's agenda
    • Anne to touch base with WG and Lynn on the issue of International realm participation in Infobutton project
      • Response from WG: Infobutton is not US-based. There is no reason that infobutton functionality would be useful only in the US. In fact, there are implementations abroad (I attached a paper as an example), including some initiatives for national implementations in Europe and US-based EHR vendors that also sell their products abroad. On the publishing side, several implementers include content in multiple languages, such as MedlinePlus and Healthwise.
        • Gora: Doesn't necessarily make it realm specific. Paul: The issue was there weren't international participants in the team.
  • Approval items from last week's e-vote referred for discussion:
    • Project Approval Request by the HSI WG of the T3SD for FHIR Document Sharing at Project Insight 1231 and TSC Tracker 12284
      • Referred by everyone!
        • Jean: The idea for HSI was to have IHE come in and have an integration point with HL7 but not produce ballotable material. If we want to change that, it requires a different move.
        • Andy: The WG does not wish to change that parameter. Austin: the cochair of HSI came to structured docs in Baltimore and asked if we'd be a cosponsor. David Pyke said the WG had worked with the Board to get agreement that they could sponsor projects. Lorraine: PI says that FHIR-I is the sponsor. Andy: David Pyke is not a cochair of HSI. Ken: I've never heard the Board discuss this issue. Wayne: At the Victoria retreat, Keith talked to Wayne about it. If there is a difference of opinion, this should be bounced back to the WG to determine where they are with this. If there is a valid reason for them to create standards, then the fact that they're in a particular SD shouldn't preclude that. The question is if this is something that should be done. Lorraine: They're in that steering division to promote appropriate behavior. Paul: People who disagreed with the scope of the group have raised it several times; they're intended to be a liaison body. Wayne: There is a board directed opportunity to look at this again given the importance of the relationship with IHE. If they need to coordinate with an owning WG, who would that be? Lorraine: This is a documents PSS so it would make sense to go with Structured Documents. Was expected to come back to ARB, but it hasn't done so yet.
          • ACTION: Get clarification from WG on what their desired scope is
        • Austin states structured docs would take it if they had to but it's not necessarily work that would happen if HSI wasn't interested in it. Calvin: It falls in Structured Documents under the FHIR product management function. Austin: It falls to us because HSI can't own resources. Lorraine: HSI is trying to make sure there's FHIR representation of IHE profiles. FHIR has said FHIR-I will facilitate if people not available to do the work. Calvin: Structured Docs should decide as a committee if they are okay with sponsoring it. Jean: The committees for this project should be Security and Structured Documents. David Pyke and others can be part of the project team. Wayne: There is another cosponsor WG, II, which seems to have a significant role. Calvin: II has represented the DICOM perspective; if there is no DICOM content then it wouldn't be appropriate.
        • Ken: There seems to be a prevailing wisdom that HSI is in the right SD; they should be doing the collaborative process with WG with domain expertise. Austin: There are those who believe that and those who don't. Some think HSI should be doing direct work. Paul: The issue is projects that result in ballotable materials. Melva: T3SD groups can do projects - just not create material that is balloted. We put them in T3SD so they would have to work with other groups if they were going to created balloted material.
        • MOTION that HSI should be allowed to be the primary sponsor of projects that create ballotable artifacts: Jean/Calvin. Further discussion over why they were originally not to create ballotable content.
        • Wayne: WG should clarify their charter first. Lorraine: We did have that conversation with them. Wayne: But their charter isn't clear - it states they do standardization activities. Calvin: We have never approved them doing balloting activity. Ken: The mission states a facilitation process, not ownership. Lorraine: They have always been divided on this within the WG. Paul: We know what their scope is and this project doesn't seem to fit. If they want a scope change, they can propose one and send it up for approval. Gora: Approval dates are missing. When it goes to SD it will probably solve itself. Paul: If we don't think it would pass even if its complete, we need to give them that feedback.
        • Jean withdraws the motion. Calvin accepts.
        • MOTION that the steering division handles this proposal, addressing the issue of missing dates and of ballotable artifacts being outside of the scope of the WG's activities: Gora/Paul
        • Paul: Are the cochairs of that steering division comfortable with that? Andy states that he would vote against this motion. The project has not come to the SD yet. Melva: I have an issue passing the buck to the steering division in this case as well. Jean: There's no reason we're even looking at this. Wayne: I am responsible for bringing this here after I received it from David Pyke, who stated that all approvals were secured.
        • MOTION withdrawn.
        • MOTION that the TSC rejects the PSS because it has not been vetted appropriately through the normal process, including going to the SD for approval: Paul/Gora
        • VOTE: Austin abstains. Remaining in favor.
        • MOTION: The TSC requests that the WG revisit the mission and charter to clarify if their scope should include balloting artifacts: Wayne/Paul
        • Discussion: Paul - it's going back and asking the question that we already have an answer to. We're not confused. We could make a motion that we request the committee modify their M&C to call out the fact that they don't ballot artifacts, but they need to come forward with the question and the point.
        • AMENDED MOTION: We request that the WG modify their Mission and Charter to include the fact that they do not sponsor projects with ballotable artifacts: Wayne/Paul
        • ACTION: Andy to carry forth the motion to HSI.
        • Freida: Note that if they do amend their mission and charter, it goes to the SD, not the TSC. Paul: I'm not comfortable with that in this particular circumstance. Andy: If they request to ballot artifacts, they would need to move to another steering division.
        • MOTION to table issue to next call: John/Paul
        • VOTE: all in favor
    • Project Approval Request by the Pharmacy WG of the DESD for Pharmacy FHIR Maturity Project at Project Insight TBD and TSC Tracker 12283
      • Referred by FTSD: The project appears to not deliver the materials until after the ballot opens.
        • Melva: We just missed that; the final content will delivered by 12/11. Melva will update the PSS.
        • MOTION to approve: Paul/Melva
        • VOTE: All in favor

Next Steps

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


© 2016 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.

Retrieved from "https://tscwiki.hl7.org/w/index.php?title=2016-10-24_TSC_Call_Agenda&oldid=17738"