20130102 FGB concall notes
Jump to navigation Jump to search
|HL7 TSC FGB Meeting Minutes
Location: call 770-657-9270 using code 985371#
|Date: 2013-01-02 |
Time: 5:00 PM U.S. Eastern
|Facilitator: Ron Parker||Note taker(s): Lynn Laakso|
|Quorum = Chair plus 2||yes|
|x||Ron Parker||x||George (Woody) Beeler||Ewout Kramer|
|x||John Quinn||regrets||Grahame Grieve|
Lynn Laakso, scribe
- Roll call -
- Agenda Review
- Approve minutes of 20121219 FGB concall notes
- FMG update -
- Methodology update-
- Review Ron's draft precept document, associated governance points and risks
- What resources need to be in the next ballot.
- On FMG call, suggested that Chairs of FMG and chairs of FGB should review and report back on the wish list of resources for DSTU ballot
- HL7/IHE/DICOM coordination (John)
- Next steps: Responsibilities for resources (education, conformity process, appeal process)
- Education workplan, coordination with Education Director
- What is the appeal process for those resources not chosen for inclusion in ballot?
- Roll call
- Agenda Review – add precept development/governance specialist resources and add meeting schedule in Phoenix; defer IHE/DICOM and next steps
- Approve minutes of 20121219 FGB concall notes Woody moves and John seconds approval. Unanimously approved.
- HL7/IHE/DICOM coordination (John) – has not yet spoken to Chuck. Mike Nusbaum and others from IHE will be in Phoenix on Monday and perhaps we can get some of their time.
- FMG update – Lynn reports discussion of 20130102 FMG concall and passes on the question whether a reference implementation server needs to be current with ballot content to allow a resource to be in the DSTU ballot. Discussion ensued themed on putting the cart before the horse on having an implementation before the draft standard is balloted. It makes more sense to have a reference implementation perhaps before the standard is published. Such prototyping is not necessary with standards definition. Resources are so context neutral that fitness for purpose is better demonstrated with some examples. It is not necessary for reference implementations prior to DSTU. HL7 has not typically provided a sandbox in which users of a DSTU can play with a draft standard rather than taking away the standards and creating their own implementation and we want to avoid creating that expectation. Need to review how Lloyd forms the question to better review.
- Methodology update- M&M has not met and their next call is next week.
- Review Ron's draft precept document, risks, conformity metrics, governance processes, people, etc.
- See Governance Vectors spreadsheet and governance vector framing document
- What constitutes success and what prevents us from achieving that, is the risk assessment. Some risks are rolling down from the TSC on product line evaluation.
- Regarding need for resources, Ron takes an action item to speak with PIC regarding using their "help wanted" wiki development
- Need for an 'HL7 Business Dictionary' for product line consistency, governance, and repository for 'terms of the art'.
- Methodology evolving – need resource for continuing governance development
- Woody notes that within those objectives you may need to identify component parts; Austin notes that TSC has identified both issues (already happening) as well as risks(may happen in future)
- Austin notes we have product line architecture kickoff meeting this Friday as well as at WGM.
- Ron will continue work on this perspective of ' If these things aren't handled what bad things will happen.' Austin notes that the Saturday will be also work on risk assessment, precepts and governance points for rules and policies around product lines.
- Plan on a call next Wednesday.
Adjourned 6:01 PM ET
|Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)|
|Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items|
Back to FHIR_Governance_Board
© 2013 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.