This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here

20140119 FGB FMG WGM

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
HL7 TSC FGB Meeting Minutes

Location: Seguin Sunday, Frio Monday, Mesquite Friday

Date: 2014-01-19
Time: 12:30 PM U.S. Central
Facilitator: Ron Parker Note taker(s): Lynn Laakso
Quorum = Chair plus 2 yes/no
FGB Chair/CTO Members Members
x Ron Parker x George (Woody) Beeler x Ewout Kramer
John Quinn regrets Grahame Grieve
FMG Co chairs
x Hugh Glover x Lloyd McKenzie
Members Members Members Observers/Guests
regrets Lorraine Constable regrets, by Skype Paul Knapp regrets, by Skype John Moehrke x Lynn Laakso, scribe
regrets, by Skype David Hay regrets Josh Mandel x Brian Pech x Austin Kreisler
x Julie James Glover


Sunday lunch FGB and FMG

Monday Q1 FGB

Monday lunch FMG

Friday Q1 FGB and FMG

  • Roll call -
  • Agenda Review
  • Will FHIR go to a second ballot?
  • FGB M&C update
  • Membership Review
    • Re-appointments
    • Review provider list and identify candidates.
  • Metrics discussion (time allowing)


Convened at 12:48 PM

Sunday lunch FGB and FMG

  • Roll call -
  • Agenda Review - Ron adds his resignation notice as FGB chair
  • FGB M&C update
    • FMG reviewed the update last week and are comfortable with it. Ron notes it can now go to the TSC. New positions identified for FGB composition will need candidate suggestions. Description of the new roles reviewed. Ewout has proposed Dave Shaver for the vendor role and will approach him this week. Lloyd has requested time slot at TSC to solicit suggestions for profiles and resources. 60 seconds as part of Woody's slot would suffice.
  • Will FHIR go to a second ballot?
    • Discussion on the list and skype chat received feedback. All held the position that we should publish now. Connectathon feedback was 14/2/0. DSTU means different things to different people so may be misunderstood by regulators on its stability. Woody and Ron speak in favor of publishing.
    • Austin asks about precepts on how to decide from FGB - this has not been established. Ron would like to discuss over the WGM how the FGB and FMG will change once the DSTU has been published.
    • Lloyd notes the risk of finding major gotcha down the road is mitigated by extensive application with connectathons etc for implementation experience. Education of what the implementers need to expect would further mitigate risk.
    • Hugh notes that it is a risk to credibility and we must publish. John Moehrke supports either position and was satisfied that the discussion had occurred. He further notes there should be some formalized operational guidelines around the DSTU feedback process. Paul Knapp agrees but defers the responsibility for that decision to HQ or ES. Woody notes that TSC discussed this last night and reviewed the enhancements enjoyed by SDWG for CCDA have been quite positive. Austin adds that TSC and ES have a project pending to make that tracking mechanism for all standards types.
    • Paul moves and Woody seconds motion to approve publication. Unanimously approved.
    • Who among the FMG will draft the publication request and product brief? TSC will have to endorse/approve the publication request. MnM is not on the hook. Lloyd will put together a draft for review on Friday.
    • Lloyd send out a draft notice to implementers by email and seeks feedback.
    • Need a frozen DSTU version, a development site for 'fixes' version plus new functionality, and a connectathon version. Brian notes that we may need four sites and was discussed at Tooling recently. Need a way to track major deltas from DSTU site. New releases of the DSTU will require either ballot or DSTU update process through TSC, neither of which will be quick to turn around; Lloyd sees a 6 to 12 month update cycle. Paul notes that the fourth site would be the DSTU update; Brian asks how you will see the differences with development responses to DSTU versus de novo development.
    • John M asks what bug tracking we'll be using. Lloyd spoke with Grahame and Ewout and had though to use GForge with adding fields, tying submissions on SVN to related trackers, using its reporting features, etc.
    • Paul asks if once published it is no longer an FMG decision or ES? Lloyd feels TSC and FMG and other WGs will have an opinion and need to ensure the solution does what we need it to do? He clarifies that he would want it to be the HL7 HQ GForge and not a public GForge site that we manage and back up, etc. The DSTU comments site is a member benefit, as is intended for the benefit of membership to contribute to a standard. However they have other requirements for traceability into source control and for outside non-member implementation experience feedback beyond what SDWG uses for CDA IGs on the DSTU comments page. Lloyd notes they will have to work with SDWG and ES on setting up the long-term solution. DSTU comments site for notifications and tracking, etc might benefit from channeling submissions into GForge.
  • Austin to address with the BOD to explicitly ensure they are ok with such an exception allowing public (non-member) contribution to the DSTU.

Adjourned 1:48 PM.

  • Membership Review
    • Re-appointments
    • Review provider list and identify candidates.
  • Metrics discussion (time allowing)

Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items

Back to FHIR_Governance_Board

© 2014 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.