20130730 FGB concall

HL7 TSC FGB Meeting Minutes Location: call 770-657-9270 using code 985371# GoToMeeting ID: 334-756-981		Date: 2013-07-30 Time: 8:00 AM U.S. Eastern
Facilitator: Ron Parker		Note taker(s): Lynn Laakso

Quorum = Chair plus 2				yes
Chair/CTO		Members		Members
x	Ron Parker	x	George (Woody) Beeler	x	Ewout Kramer
x	John Quinn		Grahame Grieve
observers/guests		x	Austin Kreisler
		x	Lynn Laakso, scribe

Agenda

• Roll call -
• Agenda Review
• Approve minutes of 20130709 FGB concall, notes of 20130723 FGB concall
• Action Item review:
  • Ron to pitch the Vitality Assessment model to the FMG and talk with them about coming up with metrics -
  • Grahame will bring a draft approach to policy assertion from the FGB on the approach to extensions and discoverability -
  • Ron and Lynn will review FGB_Resource_Contribution_policy_draft policy statements and draft bullets - see updates
  • Ewout will pull some narrative from the HIMSS stuff for the draft of a product page
• Ron will ask John to ensure the Board members have a sense of what that elevator pitch should be.
• FHIR product page:
  • Need to evaluate an entry on the banner, and entry page to FHIR page or top of FHIR page with the "what is FHIR" elevator pitch and make request to ES WG
• FMG update -
  • Update on PA resource issues and response to FGB motion
• Methodology update-
• Next steps: Define and Resource other Governance processes.

Minutes

Convened at 8:03 AM

• Agenda Review - approved by general consent
• Approve minutes of 20130709 FGB concall, John moves approval seconded by Ewout and unanimously approved. Reviewed notes of 20130723 FGB concall
• Action Item review:
  • Ron to pitch the Vitality Assessment model to the FMG and talk with them about coming up with metrics - intent is to share sensibility with FMG and get their feedback but preoccupied with DSTU production right now; postpone until after ballot open, probably August 21st. Ron on vacation the 5-9 and 12-16 August.
  • Grahame will bring a draft approach to policy assertion from the FGB on the approach to extensions and discoverability - no further discussion. Perhaps review on the 20th after ballot opens.
  • Ron and Lynn will review FGB_Resource_Contribution_policy_draft policy statements and draft bullets - see updates.
    • Austin points out that under resource development at levels less than normative, HL7 will be creating a document to separate non-normative processes from the ANSI-accredited normative process. Resources are subject to the HL7 ballot process (HL7 governance/management processes).
    • Ewout asks about what of HL7 Affiliate-created resources? Contributions are subject to HL7 IP policy. In addition, affiliates may create resources that are realm-specific that are brought back. Need an example of affiliate resources in the Background.
    • Ron would also like to encourage interest by integration vendors and product vendors to build something and insert it into the HL7 process.
    • Ewout notes the current FHIR specification has resources, as well as code and examples. Bullet on 'products' developed needs clarification. This includes reference implementations in Java that might be pulled into other vendor. Austin notes there is also a license execution with the source code and reference implementations. The resulting product should also include such license agreement.
    • Austin adds that IHE is not technically a member but we have an MOU with them. The MOUs need to be amended to specifically include IP restrictions to FHIR participation. If an external party (with an existing MOU) wishes to participate in the FHIR space they need to execute a new MOU, or they will have to create a conduit through an HL7 member. The interaction must be subject to HL7 governance and management processes.
    • Registering an extension as a form of contribution - an extension will not be treated the same as a core resource. A core extension might be published as part of the standard and would be considered a contribution, but a non-core extension registration does not constitute a contribution. The Registration of extensions developed externally is not considered a contribution. Tying this to the next background bullet with proprietary extensions registered for discoverability. Registration of external resources does not constitute contribution to IP. Core assets are subject to HL7 governance, administration and maintenance processes. Registering an extension does not fall under rubric of HL7 membership.
    • Approved HL7 project may cover multiple resources or contributions. Contributions may be associated with an existing project. We need to separate this from the SVN commit access.
    • Externally funded development implicates a process for selecting the internal developers to be funded. We may wish to indicate that ONC can focus their additional resources on something of interest to them, but not necessarily funding within HL7. They can mobilize resources to work on projects under their mandate, that contribute to the HL7 standards space. External organizations cannot 'commission a project' with HL7. They would hire a bunch of consultants to work on a project within HL7 as is already done. Such practice is HL7 policy, not just FHIR policy. Organizations should feel they can contribute, that it will be a managed asset going forward. Can we identify the risk in the work by paid consultants, with mitigation strategies that include the preponderance of influence clause, the project approval process, the balloting process, etc. Remove the discussion item from the policy statements.
  • Ewout will pull some narrative from the HIMSS stuff for the draft of a product page. Ewout sent a draft to the list.
• Ron will ask John to ensure the Board members have a sense of what that elevator pitch should be.
  • Forwarded Ewout's email to John to review with Board. Need to discuss 'what will happen to V2 and V3' with TSC. Need to have something for the plenary. Austin notes a spot in the rotation in the banner was considered.
• FHIR product page:
  • Need to evaluate an entry on the banner, and entry page to FHIR page or top of FHIR page with the "what is FHIR" elevator pitch and make request to ES WG
• FMG update -
  • Update on PA resource issues and response to FGB motion
    • Reviewed notes from 20130717_FMG_concall and noted Ron had responded by email. FGB had noted a general issue that would come up again in future and wished to give the FMG the latitude to find resolution. It wasn't raised to FGB for PA specifically as an issue

Cancel next two meetings. Re-convene on the 20th.

Adjourned 9:04 AM

Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date) John will discuss 'what will happen to V2 and V3' with TSC.

Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items 20130820 FGB concall

Back to FHIR_Governance_Board

© 2013 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.