20121217 inm teleconference

1. Call to order (2 min.)
2. Roll Call (1 min.)
3. Approval of December 10, 2012 Minutes /Agenda(2 min.)
4. Status of V2.8
5. Re-write of Chapters 2, 2a, 2c
   1. Desire to schedule time for this
   2. V2 Chapter2 Issues
6. Abstract transport discussion
   1. Item 88:General:This specification takes a broad view of the responsibilities of a messaging endpoint, ie, an HL7 messaging application, and its available networks for message transport. This specification is literally creating requirements to direct or control concepts, networks, messages, and so on that are pretty clearly outside of the HL7 application, and thus outside of the scope of HL7. Why else try to define requirements such as "at least on delivery." It's conceivable that HL7 messages will live in environments where this is _not_ a factor, or where it is sublimated into a larger transport or persistence structure.
   2. Item 89:General:This specification attempts to make normative an ad-hoc integration architecture. Instead of declaring the adapters, gateways, bridges, etc. this specification could reference them as external design patterns in an informative specification. Selection of relevant patterns is indeed of value to the industry and it ensures the use of common terminology - especially in interaction design patterns. In its current form, the fact that the ATS is normative will be of great concern to HL7 adopters as it imposes a set of very specific components that may or may not apply to an implementation as well as renaming and existing patterns.
   3. Item 90:Section 1.2: The abstract specification should provide a general-purpose guidance to implementing accept/enhanced ack in certain technology. For example, is a CE a failure mode in WS?
   4. Item 91:Section 3.2See 90
   5. Item 92:Section 3.2:
      1. The use of 'wrappers' instead of message envelopes makes it near impossible for implementers to adhere to this specfiication in an abstract way because the HL7 wrappers are not really wrappers but envelopers. The wrappers are not really wrappers in the common "wrapper design pattern" meaning of the term. The use of the term pattern in HL7 is contradictory with the accepted terms and design pattern. The choice is either to define 'HL7 wrappers" as "HL7 envelopes" or reference message envelopes.
      2. Motion to find not-persuasive.(Paul/Mark) WGM January 2007 - Miroslav - suggest pending input from other committee (InM). This is not ATS issue, as it is MCCI/HL7 methodology issue. ATS will comply to any decision coming from the responsible committee.
7. Other business and planning
8. Adjournment