Difference between revisions of "ConCall-20070116"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
WoodyBeeler (talk | contribs) |
WoodyBeeler (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Conference Call, January 16, 2007 | Conference Call, January 16, 2007 | ||
=Attendees= | =Attendees= | ||
| − | Beeler, | + | Beeler, Blobel, Lorenzi, McCay, Parker, Quinn. Unavailable: Case, Buitendijk, |
| − | = | + | =Roll Call & Accept agenda= |
| − | + | :Next weeks call shift to '''Wednesday, January 24 at noon Eastern''', then go to regular schedule | |
| − | = | + | =Core challenges for T3F= |
| − | == | + | ==Defining a Technical directorate== |
| − | : | + | :'''Goal date:''' May WGM - have a proposal that can be discussed and refined at WGM |
| + | *Establish whether TD/T3F will: oversee development, or approve/monitor/intervene projects | ||
| + | *Assume: Reasonable staffing/commitment levels for TD at | ||
| + | **2-hrs per week is realistic (1 call, 1 work) ('''Note:''' SI plan says 3-4 hrs/wk) | ||
| + | **5-7 hours during a WGM | ||
| − | == | + | ==Coordinate our vision with the Board== |
| − | + | :'''Goal date(s):''' First report in 30 days, then continue | |
| − | + | *Verify that Governance & Structure is not in conflict with us | |
| − | ** | + | *Continue our collaboration with Project Life Cycle |
| − | ** | + | **Add Action item to be sure Life Cycle is implementable in organization |
| − | |||
| − | + | ==Maintain clear open communication to membership== (ongoing) | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | '''NOTE: ''' Do NOT edit these minutes the same list appears as [[Core Challenges For T3F]] where it can be revised, amended and appended. | |
| − | + | =[[T3F Action item list]]= | |
Formally - Accepted [[T3F Action item list|Items 2 thru 6 on the list]], thereby completing item 1 | Formally - Accepted [[T3F Action item list|Items 2 thru 6 on the list]], thereby completing item 1 | ||
Charlie McCay accepted action to to assemble list of documents for consideration under item 3.1 of [[T3F Action item list|action item list]]. | Charlie McCay accepted action to to assemble list of documents for consideration under item 3.1 of [[T3F Action item list|action item list]]. | ||
| − | + | =Six Core Architectural Features= | |
| + | We discussed [[Six Core Architecture Features]]. The discussion rambled but there seemed to be consensus on three key points: | ||
| + | # As listed, the features are "ok" for a techie elevator talk | ||
| + | # The features need to be extended to include an over-arching schema and references or bindings to existing technical architectures (e.g. Zachmann) '''''See e-mail from Blobel''''' | ||
| + | # This list '''must open''' with its relationship to HL7's product strategy and mission -- paraphrased as "to do whats needed for interoperability" '''''(E-mail from Lorenzi will be used to update the six-features page)''''' | ||
| − | + | =Communications strategy= | |
| − | Dropped for lack of time | + | Dropped for lack of time, but was added to Core challenges |
=[[T3F Agenda item list|Agenda item list (our sand box for future meetings)]]= | =[[T3F Agenda item list|Agenda item list (our sand box for future meetings)]]= | ||
=[[T3F Action item list|Click for T3F Action Item List]]= | =[[T3F Action item list|Click for T3F Action Item List]]= | ||
Revision as of 17:58, 16 January 2007
Conference Call, January 16, 2007
Contents
Attendees
Beeler, Blobel, Lorenzi, McCay, Parker, Quinn. Unavailable: Case, Buitendijk,
Roll Call & Accept agenda
- Next weeks call shift to Wednesday, January 24 at noon Eastern, then go to regular schedule
Core challenges for T3F
Defining a Technical directorate
- Goal date: May WGM - have a proposal that can be discussed and refined at WGM
- Establish whether TD/T3F will: oversee development, or approve/monitor/intervene projects
- Assume: Reasonable staffing/commitment levels for TD at
- 2-hrs per week is realistic (1 call, 1 work) (Note: SI plan says 3-4 hrs/wk)
- 5-7 hours during a WGM
Coordinate our vision with the Board
- Goal date(s): First report in 30 days, then continue
- Verify that Governance & Structure is not in conflict with us
- Continue our collaboration with Project Life Cycle
- Add Action item to be sure Life Cycle is implementable in organization
==Maintain clear open communication to membership== (ongoing)
NOTE: Do NOT edit these minutes the same list appears as Core Challenges For T3F where it can be revised, amended and appended.
T3F Action item list
Formally - Accepted Items 2 thru 6 on the list, thereby completing item 1
Charlie McCay accepted action to to assemble list of documents for consideration under item 3.1 of action item list.
Six Core Architectural Features
We discussed Six Core Architecture Features. The discussion rambled but there seemed to be consensus on three key points:
- As listed, the features are "ok" for a techie elevator talk
- The features need to be extended to include an over-arching schema and references or bindings to existing technical architectures (e.g. Zachmann) See e-mail from Blobel
- This list must open with its relationship to HL7's product strategy and mission -- paraphrased as "to do whats needed for interoperability" (E-mail from Lorenzi will be used to update the six-features page)
Communications strategy
Dropped for lack of time, but was added to Core challenges
