20150511 FMG WGM

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

Location: Apogee 4

Date: 2015-05-11
Time: 12:30 PM
Chair: Note taker(s): Anne W.
Quorum = chair + 4 yes/no
Co chairs x David Hay x Lloyd McKenzie
ex-officio Woody Beeler,
Dave Shaver
FGB Co-chairs
. John Quinn, CTO
Members Members Members Observers/Guests
x Hans Buitendijk x Brian Postlethwaite Paul Knapp x Anne W., scribe
x Josh Mandel x John Moehrke Brian Pech


  • Roll Call
  • Agenda
    • FMG ballot items
    • WG liaison objectives
    • Hot topics
    • AOB (Any Other Business)


  • Called to order at 12:37
  • Agenda reviewed
  • Lloyd announces that FHIR Infrastructure WG has now been approved by the TSC. Interim co-chairs are Lloyd, Grahame, Ewout, and Josh. Will go up for election in October.
  • MOTION to approve minutes from last call made by Brian Post. David asks to add FHIR registry to the agenda for today.
  • FMG Ballot Items: Reviewed FMG tracker items.
    • #7049 regarding registry: Grahame is working with executive team. Have some funding and technical plan. Grahame will bring up a website, Furore will bring up the registry and then Grahame will hand over to FMG. There are still details to be sorted out financially. Timeline is weeks, prior to publication of DSTU2. Grahame does not currently need any assistance from FMG.
    • Item 8008 re: common headings – not sure why assigned to FMG. Should there be guidance around layout for IGs and are we at the point where we should provide such guidance? If we have templates, having tooling is a requirement for consistency. Can we define a list of high level sections that IGs should adhere to? Are we at the point where it makes sense to do that? Furore’s work is around the discreet portions. Group feels we could come up with very high level guidance but it is too soon for detailed work on the subject. What we’re lacking is a lot of feedback from implementers around what would be helpful. Response to this would be to initiate acquiring feedback from implementers. Once we have the feedback we can then start issuing guidance. ACTION: David will take the lead on drafting request for feedback from implementers.
  • Hot topics: difference between base standard and best practices in other standards. FHIR is not a best practice spec; it’s a platform spec. Resources are not best practices. Lloyd will define a group for identifying them.
  • Prioritization: ballot comments must be reconciled and triaged based on things that will involve substantive change.
  • Timelines: Nominal timeline is that we want dispositions done/changes made with a QA window of two weeks with publishing at the end of July. It is ambitious; do we want to continue with that assertion or change it? And if we change, what to? One idea is to go forth with that timeline and ask for feedback on if it’s realistic over the coming weeks. We will contact them or they will contact us by the end of this month with time estimates based on what has been completed vs. what is left.
  • 2.1 release: intend to do a 2.1 release with limited scope, including resources that were in draft state and cleaning up workflow resources including Order and Request resources. Will accept requests for additional candidates for that release, but won’t be a general release. Initial thought was that we would ballot it in September but will likely target that release for January. If a WG wants to push something else in 2.1 they will need to talk to FMG. John M. states we should put a timeline forth for 2.1 to get the work in good shape before the Connectathon. Content freeze would be late September, content deadline will be calculated based on January ballot deadlines. If resources want to get themselves lined up that are outside the proposed scope, they will need to make a special request.
  • Grahame reviews FHIR maturity model with the group.
  • Lloyd would like to send a note of thanks to the WGs. There is a lot of ballot feedback but none that is earth shattering.
  • ballot item number 1109 regarding QICore profiles being isolated from the rest of FHIR: in the resources, we don’t talk about what is the normative representation – they are all normative.

Adjourned at 1:37 pm

Back to FHIR_Management_Group

© 2015 Health Level Seven® International