From HL7 TSC
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Foundation and Technology Steering Division Workgroup Meeting

FTSD - Foundation & Technology Steering Division


  • Vocabulary
    • Ted Klein
    • Beverly Knight
    • Russ Hamm
    • Jobst Landgrebe
  • Infrastructure & Messaging (InM)
    • Grahame Grieve
    • Sandy Stuart
  • Implementation/Conformance
    • Jane Gilbert
    • Frank Oemig
  • Security
    • Bernd Blobel
  • Implementable Technology Specifications (ITS)
    • Charlie McCay
    • Paul Knapp
    • Dale Nelson
  • Service Oriented Architecture (SOA)
    • Ken Rubin
  • Templates
    • Mark Shafarman
  • Modeling & Methodology (MnM)
    • Grahame Grieve
    • Woody Beeler
    • Dale Nelson
  • RIM-Based Application Architecture (RIMBAA)


  • This weeks TSC discussions inre:
    • Update Work Group 3-yr plans at/by September WGM
    • Value of reviewing Board Roadmap projects from Work Group perspectives
    • Positioning of current work in re Enterprise Architecture Framework publications
    • Intent to review/release SAEAF documentation on a trimester cycle

Discussion of Low Attendance at SD Conference Calls

Briefly, the repetitive schedule is a burden because the content seems of little real import. Calls are not engaging the Work Group Co-Chairs in the critical decisions of the TSC.

Ways to "Engage" the Work Groups

  • Find the shared "Hot Topics" or Issues that Co-chairs feel will improve HL7 and the TSC
  • Use SD as vehicle in which to share strategies for dealing with ballot issues that are particularly "thorny' (Example from Vocab in re CTS2 ballot)
  • Address issues that underlie the continuing perception that the EAF is being done "to" the Work Groups rather than "with" or "by" the Work Groups.
    • Perception that comments and reviews are not read and responded to
    • Seems no formal feed back of "response" to comments, just a "thank you" is not reasonable
    • Slide decks seem to have little "meat" to them
    • Unclear what the organization (presumably the TSC) means by endorsing SAEAF
      • Paraphrase of one response was: "The TSC and HL7 are committed to implementing a new Enterprise Architecture based on the initial work in SAEAF. The architecture will evolve over time, as we (all of HL7) learns what works/what doesn't; what meets needs of HL7 clients and customers, etc. BUT there is a commitment to grow with the SAEAF and ARB process."
  • Agreed to keep discussion of how best to - understand, review, interact with, contribute to, test - the SAEAF as a major thread or set thereof on the SD list.

Adjourned at 8:15

  • Agreed to push a discussion on the SD list of the ways that the SAEAF evolution