This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here

20140616 FGB concall

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

Location: call 770-657-9270 using code 985371#
GoToMeeting ID: 136-494-157

Date: 2014-06-16
Time: 8:00 AM U.S. Eastern
Facilitator: Note taker(s): David
Quorum = Chair plus 2 yes/no
Co-Chair/CTO Members
George (Woody) Beeler regrets Lorraine Constable Grahame Grieve David Hay
Dave Shaver Ewout Kramer Lloyd McKenzie (FMG) Ron Parker
John Quinn
observers/guests Austin Kreisler
regrets Lynn Laakso, scribe

Agenda

  • Roll call -
  • Agenda Review
  • Approve minutes of 20140609 FGB concall
  • Action Item review:
  • Report back from TSC on approval of updated M&C?
  • Issues passed down from TSC
    • Governance Issues in re FHIR Registry - particularly:
      • Distinction between registering an item onto an open list vs. Assigning identifiers and registering their assignment
      • Determine whether HL7, in instituting charges for the OID registry, means to include a fee for retrieving registrations from the registry, or only for adding items thereto. And, if the latter wjat is the intended distinction between: "internal" addition requests, "member" addition requests, and "outside" addition requests?
      • Built-in protections against BOT submissions
      • Expectations for "automated curation" surrounding elements that carry identifiers in HL7-managed namespaces, particularly uri: http://hl7.org/fhir ... and OIDs: 2.16.840.1.113883...
  • Updates to FHIR_Governance_Precepts
  • FMG update -
  • Methodology update-
  • Next steps: Define and Resource other Governance processes.
    1. Conformity Assessment



Minutes

Attendees

  • Woody Beeler (WB)
  • Lloyd McKenzie (LM)
  • David Hay (DH)
  • Dave Shearer (DS)
  • Ewout Kramer (EK)

Convened by Woody Beeler at 4:07

  • Agenda Review
    • Fundamentals of FHIR
    • Governance around FHIR registry
    • Review precepts
    • Lloyd move – dave second pass 3/0/0
  • Approve minutes of 20140609 FGB concall LM move, DS second pass 3/0/0
  • WB report from TSC:
    • A project had CDA changes had not approached Structured Docs (SD). A reminder that any groups involved with anothers groups work should be a co-sponsor
    • Overview by tony Julian on GOM review project. Governance at product line level – need to be governance at multiple levels.
      • EK – a philosophical question. Agree that can’t make too generic.
      • LM – some generic principles – will vary by context. Do need multiple bodies. Will be overlap. Benefit by co-ordination & communication.
      • WB – focus on specific, but look out for common one
    • TSC report on updated mission & charter
      • TSC accepted review
      • Nothing further required
    • Reviewing fundamental Principles of FHIR
      • Hadn’t finished review last week
      • FHIR Leverages web technologies
        • WB try to avoid using social media
        • Don’t like ‘Internet’
          • EW – Internet is wider than web (eg FTP).
          • LM – FHIR is tied to web. Will it still be FHIR if not?. Don’t like tying to ‘newness’ (won’t be new in 10 years). Need to focus on current tech – which is web.
          • EK – agree inspired by the way the web works. Will accept term web.
          • Can use other protocols (eg MLLP) but would lose some benefits of HTTP.
        • Some editing of wording
          • Solutions -> services
          • Remove facebook as example
      • FHIR is forward & backward compatible
        • LM - Hard but necessary (reason why v3/CDA are struggling)
        • WB – noble but what are the long term implications.
          • LM: possible (DICOM have been doing). Does have some constraints – e.g. need to create a new resource.
          • EK: change is inevitable.
          • LM: new release roughly bi-annual. Rare to update resources. Common for new resources, new capabilities (e.g. FHIR in SOAP)
          • WB – what happens when DSTU resources start to circulate in Normative space.
            • LM – they were warned! Do need to have a path forward...
            • EK – splintering already happening (Germany, Lithuania)
            • LM – spec is clear on conformance. Can’t stop people ‘rolling their own’ – but not FHIR conformant.
          • WB – is a governance issue. Maybe not address here. HL7 Organization needs a very clear statement on this issue.
          • EK: we understand that you have functional software that you don’t want to change (unlike google changing API at will)
          • Added comment that using v2 as goal
          • LM: difference between interoperability & compatibility?? – eg v2 tooling can understand any version of v2
      • Move that complete: move EK second LM - pass 3/0/0
      • Send to FMG
    • Meeting adjourn 5:04


Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
  • Send Fundamental Principles of FHIR to FMG
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items


Back to FHIR_Governance_Board

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