Difference between revisions of "Concall-20080609"

From HL7 TSC
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 17: Line 17:
 
* ARB Chair: Charlie Mead
 
* ARB Chair: Charlie Mead
 
* HQ: Karen Van Hentenryck  
 
* HQ: Karen Van Hentenryck  
== invited ==  
+
== Invited ==  
 
* Charles Jaffe (CEO); Ed Hammond (HL7 Chair); Chuck Meyer (HL7 Vice Chair)
 
* Charles Jaffe (CEO); Ed Hammond (HL7 Chair); Chuck Meyer (HL7 Vice Chair)
 +
 
== Apologies ==
 
== Apologies ==
 
* Ioana Singureanu (will be late)
 
* Ioana Singureanu (will be late)
Line 35: Line 36:
 
##*Vital Records DAM from PHER [http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/tracker/download.php/52/313/609/482/HL7%20VR%20DAM%20Project%20Scope%20May%202008.doc]
 
##*Vital Records DAM from PHER [http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/tracker/download.php/52/313/609/482/HL7%20VR%20DAM%20Project%20Scope%20May%202008.doc]
 
##*Immunization DAM from PHER [http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/tracker/download.php/52/313/610/483/PHER%20Immunization%20DAM%20Project%20Scope%20Statement%2020080523.doc]
 
##*Immunization DAM from PHER [http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/tracker/download.php/52/313/610/483/PHER%20Immunization%20DAM%20Project%20Scope%20Statement%2020080523.doc]
##*Detailed Clinical Models from Patient Care [http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/tracker/download.php/52/313/611/484/HL7%20Project%20Scope%20Statement_PatientCare2008DCM-ID320.doc]
+
##*Detailed Clinical Models from Patient Care [http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/tracker/download.php/52/313/611/484/HL7%20Project%20Scope%20Statement_PatientCare2008DCM-ID320.doc]- The TSC noted that this project indicates they need some funding but they don't provide a budget.  Beeler wondered why this project isn't being cast as several topics within Patient Care.  Essentially, they are defining patterns (sometimes called archetypes or templates). '''ACTION ITEM''':  John Quinn should weigh in our this project, particularly since the EU has indicated that they will be using Open EHR and CEN 16601 standards.This project should also be checked against the ArB activities. '''ACTION ITEM''': The Domain Experts co-chairs will seek a budget from the submitting committee before bringing this project proposal back to the TSC for a vote.
##*Clinical Content Development, Harmonization and Definition from CIC [http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/tracker/download.php/52/313/612/485/PSS_CIC_ClinicalContent%20(2)_05202008.doc]- The TSC noted that this project indicates they need some funding but they don't provide a budget.  Beeler wondered why this project isn't being cast as several topics within Patient Care.  Essentially, they are defining patters (sometimes called archetypes or templates). '''ACTION ITEM''':  John Quinn should weigh in our this project, particularly since the EU has indicated that they will be using Open EHR and CEN 16601 standards.This project should also be checked against the ArB activities. '''ACTION ITEM''': The Domain Experts co-chairs will seek a budget from the submitting committee before bringing this project proposal back to the TSC for a vote.  
+
##*Clinical Content Development, Harmonization and Definition from CIC [http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/tracker/download.php/52/313/612/485/PSS_CIC_ClinicalContent%20(2)_05202008.doc]- 
 
##*The Domain Experts SD approved a project scope statement for HL7 Implementation Guidance for Unique Object Identifiers (OIDs), however, there was considerable discussion regarding whether or not it was appropriate for this project to be driven by the Attachments WG. This project needs additional discussion in a broader context than just the Domain Experts SD. [http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/tracker/download.php/52/313/613/486/approved%20oid%20guidance%20hl7_project_scope_statement_v1_2_12.doc].  A process question was raised as part of the discussion of this project. Was it appropriate for the Domain Experts to approve this project? Instead of approving the project some feel the SD should reject it and have the work group work with INM and others to move it forward.
 
##*The Domain Experts SD approved a project scope statement for HL7 Implementation Guidance for Unique Object Identifiers (OIDs), however, there was considerable discussion regarding whether or not it was appropriate for this project to be driven by the Attachments WG. This project needs additional discussion in a broader context than just the Domain Experts SD. [http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/tracker/download.php/52/313/613/486/approved%20oid%20guidance%20hl7_project_scope_statement_v1_2_12.doc].  A process question was raised as part of the discussion of this project. Was it appropriate for the Domain Experts to approve this project? Instead of approving the project some feel the SD should reject it and have the work group work with INM and others to move it forward.
 
## Foundation & Technology - The revised Java SIG charter was distributed to all the steering divisions for review. '''MOTION by SD''': To approve modifications to JAVA committee name/mission charter [http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/tracker/download.php/52/313/583/478/RIMBA-Mission-Charter-approved.doc].  There were a couple of concerns raised by PHER in that its not clear that this group is not developing RIM-based applications and they requested clarifying language.  The motion passed with one abstention.
 
## Foundation & Technology - The revised Java SIG charter was distributed to all the steering divisions for review. '''MOTION by SD''': To approve modifications to JAVA committee name/mission charter [http://hl7projects.hl7.nscee.edu/tracker/download.php/52/313/583/478/RIMBA-Mission-Charter-approved.doc].  There were a couple of concerns raised by PHER in that its not clear that this group is not developing RIM-based applications and they requested clarifying language.  The motion passed with one abstention.

Latest revision as of 16:57, 16 June 2008

TSC - Technical Steering Committee

Monday, June 9th, 2008 11:00 AM (US Eastern Time, GMT -5)
To participate, dial 770-657-9270 and enter pass code 124466#
GoToMeeting at https://www.gotomeeting.com/join/822618174
GoToMeeting ID: 822-618-174 

back to TSC Minutes and Agendas

Attendance

Expected

  • CTO: John Quinn
  • Domain Experts: Jim Case (primary), Austin Kreisler (alternate)
  • Foundation & Technology: Ioana Singureanu (primary), Woody Beeler (alternate)
  • Structure & Semantic Design: Calvin Beebe (primary), Gregg Seppala (alternate)
  • Technical & Support Services: Ken McCaslin (primary), Helen Stevens Love (alternate)
  • Affiliate: Frank Oemig,
  • ARB Chair: Charlie Mead
  • HQ: Karen Van Hentenryck

Invited

  • Charles Jaffe (CEO); Ed Hammond (HL7 Chair); Chuck Meyer (HL7 Vice Chair)

Apologies

  • Ioana Singureanu (will be late)

Agenda

  1. (5 min) Meeting Admin
    1. Roll Call - Quorum was established with the following individual participating on the call: Chuck Meyer, Austin Kreisler, Gregg Seppala, Charlie McCay, Woody Beeler, Ken McCaslin, Chalrie Mead, Helen Stevens-Love, and Karen Van Hentenryck
    2. Accept Agenda - The agenda was accepted.
    3. Approve Minutes from concall-20080602 - Minutes were unanimously approved.
  2. (20 min) Standing Committee Reports/Approvals
    1. CEO Report - No report was submitted.
    2. CTO Report - No report was submitted
    3. ARB report - Charlie Mead reported that the ArB is focused on thier first jumpstart meeting in Rockville, MD. Seven of the the ArB members are committed to attend this meeting. They had to limit the number of observers due to size of the meeting room. The agenda for the first two days will be consist of 3 hours of work time (with observers truly only observing, followed by an hour of interwith, an hour lunch, 3 more hours of work time, and a final hour of interaction. The third day is a half-day. The ArB's main focus this coming week is finalizing the agenda for each of the three hour work blocks. By this Thursday, the ArB will have a preliminiary agenda that can be distributed before the jumptstart meeting. MOTION by Charlie Mead: That Jane Curry be added as an official member of the ArB; seconded by McCaslin. Charlie Mead noted that Jane has been an active participant in meetings and conference calls to date. Charlie Mead also reported that one of the ArB members will likely be resigning in the near future. The motion was unanimously approved. Chuck Meyer raised the issue of having an alternate to represent the ArB on the TSC call should Charlie Mead not be available. Charlie Mead noted that John Koisch is the likely candidate but he would like to speak to John Koisch first before committing him. Charlie Mead reported that one of the topcis that the ArB has spent the most time on is how to position what the ArB is doing. We need to be clear that we aren't abandoning the work that HL7 has done to date in favor of Services, but the CTO has been clear that clear that Services will be a part of our formal architecture.
    4. Affiliates Report - Nothing to report
    5. Domain Experts - Austin Kreisler reported that the Domain Experts approved the first four projects listed below. These will be distributed to the other Steering Divisions and the Affiliate chairs this week, with a vote taken on next week's TSC call:
      • Vital Records DAM from PHER [1]
      • Immunization DAM from PHER [2]
      • Detailed Clinical Models from Patient Care [3]- The TSC noted that this project indicates they need some funding but they don't provide a budget. Beeler wondered why this project isn't being cast as several topics within Patient Care. Essentially, they are defining patterns (sometimes called archetypes or templates). ACTION ITEM: John Quinn should weigh in our this project, particularly since the EU has indicated that they will be using Open EHR and CEN 16601 standards.This project should also be checked against the ArB activities. ACTION ITEM: The Domain Experts co-chairs will seek a budget from the submitting committee before bringing this project proposal back to the TSC for a vote.
      • Clinical Content Development, Harmonization and Definition from CIC [4]-
      • The Domain Experts SD approved a project scope statement for HL7 Implementation Guidance for Unique Object Identifiers (OIDs), however, there was considerable discussion regarding whether or not it was appropriate for this project to be driven by the Attachments WG. This project needs additional discussion in a broader context than just the Domain Experts SD. [5]. A process question was raised as part of the discussion of this project. Was it appropriate for the Domain Experts to approve this project? Instead of approving the project some feel the SD should reject it and have the work group work with INM and others to move it forward.
    6. Foundation & Technology - The revised Java SIG charter was distributed to all the steering divisions for review. MOTION by SD: To approve modifications to JAVA committee name/mission charter [6]. There were a couple of concerns raised by PHER in that its not clear that this group is not developing RIM-based applications and they requested clarifying language. The motion passed with one abstention.
    7. Review suggested GOM updates - Chuck Meyer will distribute clarification via emmail.

The call adjourned at 12:50 pm ET

Agenda item list (our sand box for future meetings)

Click for TSC Action Item List