This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
<meta name="googlebot" content="noindex">

20140212 FMG concall

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

Location: call 770-657-9270 using code 985371#

Date: 2014-02-12
Time: 1:00 PM U.S. Eastern
Chair: Hugh Note taker(s): Lynn
Quorum = chair + 4 yes/no
Co chairs x Hugh Glover x Lloyd McKenzie
ex-officio Ron Parker, FGB Chair . John Quinn, CTO
Members Members Members Observers/Guests
x Lorraine Constable x Paul Knapp John Moehrke x Lynn Laakso, scribe
regrets David Hay Josh Mandel x Brian Pech Austin Kreisler
. Ewout Kramer
x Rob Mulders, Furore



  • Agenda Check - Hugh convenes at 1:04 PM - not just demo but Furore's plans for the tool. Lloyd mentions the review he sent around and request for FHIR wiki cleanup. Hugh also mentions they need to schedule their attendance at the FGB.
  • Minutes from 20140205_FMG_concall Lloyd moves and Brian seconds approval; unanimously approved.
  • FHIR Profile Tool demo (Rob) he describes Furore and their work. They are working on FHIR in several countries. The look to training, teaming and tooling with FHIR. Training started last year, teaming begins with Estonia where their developers will work with developers in their own companies. Tooling will get serious in 2015 but the profile editor is of interest sooner. They intend to release an executable for free, make it open source, and create a community (mainly EU) and let people know about Furore. Other tools like browser, validator, sprinkler, etc are planned. They plan to remain services provider not product supplier. There may be a market for managed and hosted services on the tools.
    • Developers are the target for the tooling. Not much interest in the source on the profile editor yet. Lloyd's concern is if HL7 becomes dependent on the tool they are at risk if Furore changes the licensing model. Rob is open to suggestions on arrangements to ensure access to it.
    • Rob is also interested in an HL7 profile repository and Furore might be able to host it for them. Profile, value set, concept map and namespace are the current targets for an HL7 repository notes Lloyd. Rob offers the ideas of version control and forums etc. They currently use GitHub and it works well for them. They could consider an investment for setup and then a managed hosting arrangement.
    • Hugh asks if this would be for HL7 or for any and all external users (e.g. non member hospitals) having local profiles.
    • Paul notes while the tool might be privately held do we make the methodology open? HL7 typically doesn't endorse single source products. Lloyd thinks we're covered with an open JSON interface, etc. As HL7 looks at hosting it, they are also interested in building a community. They would seek to build participation. Access to the repository might be considered a membership benefit however, like metrics on who is using which resources, offering premier search return.
    • Rob describes how they have discussed the repository itself being hosted on a FHIR server, offering profile validation.
    • Lloyd describes the HL7 process of outsourcing from HL7 on an open bid.
    • Lloyd directs Rob to look at the wiki page where we are gathering requirements for the registries. Rob can look at these and will come up with an estimate of development and operational costs. Hugh notes that this group does not have the authority to commission such work; Rob understands.
    • Lloyd notes the source of the profile editor itself is an open issue, separate from hosting on a repository; HL7 would still like to edit profiles even if they create their own repository. How do we create confidence that it will remain available to HL7 if Furore ceases maintenance on the tool? A code escrow agreement is cited as one example.
    • Rob does not have a demo prepared but can ask someone to do so on the next meeting. It won't be Ewout but another developer on the tool. Rob will send his notes to Lloyd to share with Lynn and will let FMG know when they have estimates on the tool and storage.
  • Action Items:
    • Lloyd to get an update from Cecil on the OID registry - that's going to take a while - there is a wiki page on registry requirements and Lloyd will send the link again. He has asked Cecil what it would take to tie in the OID registry with these requirements.
  • FHIR Proposals (Resource and Profile) review and continued discussion on Naming convention, visibility of non-HL7 ballot candidates, realm, level of recognition
    • Hugh describes the changes he has made so far to the page(s). Ballot levels beyond DSTU discussed. While HL7 allows work to go straight to normative, we may wish to set governance that it is prohibited except with special dispensation such as testing at a couple connectathons etc.
    • Detailed information on constraints and extensions might go lower in the proposal and allow narrative instead of an enumerated list. Parent resource should be plural resource(s).
  • Reports
    • Connectathon management (David/Brian) - need scenarios soon; defer to next week when David is back. Might wish to exercise "questionnaire".
    • FGB – no quorum this week. Ron was stuck on a bus. No responses to the request for candidates for FMG. There has been one self-nomination for FGB.
    • MnM –
    • FMG Liaisons
      • Lloyd reports CG moving forward on defining resources; RCRIM is not. We want representation from pharma but they haven't indicated interest. New BRIDG group might bring participation back from the missing sector(s).
      • Paul reports a flurry of trying to arrange FHIR quarters for the May meeting. Lloyd notes that some verbal agreements to hold the same session schedule did not get communicated to HQ as joint sessions (with FHIR representatives attending) for onsite guide and room sizing details. Lloyd had to reconcile a number of differences once submissions were entered and it should be ironed out. The new tool will be welcome once it's available.
  • review he sent around on FAQs/KB articles from Lloyd Grahame and Lorraine
    • help desk as a member only site means it will be HL7 IP.
    • FMG might be responsible for review and validation but ongoing maintenance process may be delegated to the WGs but Lorraine notes there may be individuals assigned to review - may need to be funded in order to not burden volunteer WG cochairs to maintain content.
    • FMG to go through the proposed list and list the ones they wish to be included. You may wish to go to the help desk for CDA content and see how it's organized. Hugh notes that FHIR is different as there is such a great amount of documentation.
  • request for FHIR wiki cleanup - Lloyd will send it out.
  • postpone Policy and Governance Recommendations for Publishing, Tooling and Electronic Services Support for FHIR draft recommendations for FGB in defining governance precepts (Brian, Lorraine, Paul) and Lloyd's update - may be some updates needed to the GOM.

Adjourned 2:01 PM

Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items
  • Request for reviewing/approving the FAQs/KBs for FHIR (50 FAQs / 25 KBs) (Reviewer/Approver: FMG) during the following timeframes:
    • Week of February 17, 2014: Work Groups Review/Approve: First set of questions (FAQ)
    • Week of March 3, 2014: Work Groups Review/Approve: Second set of questions (FAQ), first set of answers, first set of KB articles
    • Week of March 17, 2014: Work Groups Review/Approve: Final FAQs including all referenced resources, final KB articles

20140219 FMG concall

Back to FHIR_Management_Group

© 2014 Health Level Seven® International