This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
20150708 FMG concall
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| HL7 TSC FMG Meeting Minutes Location: |
Date: 2015-07-08 Time: 4:00 PM U.S. Eastern | |
| Chair: | Note taker(s): Anne W. | |
| Quorum = chair + 4 | yes/no | |||||
| Co chairs | Regrets | 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 | John Moehrke | x | Brian Pech | |||
| x | Brian Scheller | ||||||
| x | Rob Hausam | ||||||
Agenda
- Roll Call
- Agenda Check
- Minutes from 20150701_FMG_concall
- Administrative
- Action items
- Anne to go through list of all resources and profiles in the continuous daily build for FHIR and cross check against those we have proposals for and identify those we don’t have proposals for
- Discusion Topics:
- What are the resources without proposals and what shall we do with them?
- Do we have any ballot reconciliation to do?
- FMG Tracking Sheet
- Action items
- Reports
- Connectathon management (David/Brian)
- FGB –
- MnM –
- FMG Liaisons –
- Process management
- Ballot Planning
- Ballot content review and QA process FHIR QA Guidelines
- AOB (Any Other Business)
Minutes
- MOTION to approve agenda by Hans, second by Brian.
- VOTE: all in favor
- MOTION to approve 7/1 minutes by Hans, second by Brian.
- VOTE: all in favor
- MOTION to approve 6/24 minutes by Hans, second by Brian.
- VOTE: all in favor
- Resource and Profile review for existing proposals:
- Binary resource – was not renamed, does not have resource proposal.
- ACTION: Anne to look for list of resources that got renamed and and also flag if present in DSTU 1.
- MOTION to grandfather it and others in DSTU 1 that don’t have proposals but insist on proposals for DSTU 2 material.
- VOTE: All in favor
- Binary resource – was not renamed, does not have resource proposal.
- Profiles
- None for QICore, US Lab or Structured Data Capture. Discussion over how to handle. Lloyd’s solution: Anyone who wants to create a profile that is just defining extentsions, they can do that without a proposal. If you want to create profiles for any other purpose and have them included as part of the FHIR Core Spec, FMG should review. For IGs, we look at them as far as how they relate together but we don’t get involved in the details of overlap. Brian Post wonders how it will appear when published in the registry. Hans wonders if it’s part of Core, he agrees that we should review that, but the moment it’s not part of Core is where he would draw the line. Brian Pech: as we get IGs and profiles over the next several cycles, this may sort itself out. Lloyd: for DSTU 2, it’s reasonable for us to say that anything that is an IG, so long as we’ve seen the PSS, it’s good. If anything is balloting as part of FHIR core there should be a profile proposal and if there isn’t one, we need to have one created.
- ACTION: Anne to pull out profiles that are part of QICore, DAF and SDC and see what’s left for next week.
- Ballot reconciliation: 8 items assigned to FMG.
- Tracker item #3297 - William Goosen’s item regarding potential patient or data safety issues if user changes codes. Resolution statement: Conformance with FHIR does not provide any guarantee of patient safety. However, choosing not to conform to FHIR carries additional risk in two ways: 1) FHIR has been subject to a level of review and vetting unlikely to be received by any non-conformant variation which may result in introduction of undetected risks, and 2) FHIR-like solutions may set expectations by interoperability partners which are not met due to the non-conformance of the system, and these un-met expectations may also result in risk.
- MOTION by Hans to add this language to page on FHIR conformance. Josh seconds.
- VOTE: All in favor.
- Tracker item #5553 regarding resource pages indicating the WG responsible for cultivating the resource. Discussion over audience of resource pages.
- MOTION by Hans to add a direct link to the tracking spreadsheet from the FHIR wiki page as a solution. Second by Brian Post.
- VOTE: All in favor.
- Tracker item #5623 regarding blood/donated tissue and organs being in scope for Device. Hans suggests this should be a discussion between OO and Devices, not an issue for FMG. Reassigned the issue.
- Tracker item 6187 regarding referring to both StructureDefinition and ElementDefinition. Reassigned to FHIR Infrastructure.
- Tracker item 6284 regarding ConsentDirective vs. Contract. Workgroup is handling this, so no further action necessary by FMG.
- Tracker item 7049 regarding profile registry. Should not be a negative vote against the spec because the lack of a registry does not require changes to the spec.
- MOTION by Hans to categorize it as not related because the registry is not within the scope of the ballot. Second by John Moehrke.
- VOTE: all in favor
- Tracker item 7968 regarding publishing timeline. Response: the release timeline must be a balance between the need to support additional requirements and provide guidances that improve interoperability and the need to give implementers sufficient time to adapt. Once FHIR content becomes normative, there will not be breaking changes. Even prior to going normative, the FHIR Maturity Model ensures that breaking change proposals for “mature” resources face increased scrutiny The specific timelines will evolve based on implementer need…(see further verbiage in the tracker).”
- MOTION by Brian Post to accept the response; second by Hans.
- VOTE: all in favor
- Tracker item 8195 regarding representing clinical data in FHIR. Resolution to replace the Support: Stack Overflow (When to use) section with a link that says “How to get support?” Will also include the same link on the FHIR for Developers & FHIR for Architects pages. These will redirect to a wiki page that will include the guidance about stack overflow as well as all of the other engagement points (Skype chat, WG list servers and calls, blogs, etc.) along with guidance about when to use each…(for full text, see tracker item).
- MOTION by John Moehrke to accept resolution language; Hans seconds.
- VOTE: all in favor.
- Tracker item #3297 - William Goosen’s item regarding potential patient or data safety issues if user changes codes. Resolution statement: Conformance with FHIR does not provide any guarantee of patient safety. However, choosing not to conform to FHIR carries additional risk in two ways: 1) FHIR has been subject to a level of review and vetting unlikely to be received by any non-conformant variation which may result in introduction of undetected risks, and 2) FHIR-like solutions may set expectations by interoperability partners which are not met due to the non-conformance of the system, and these un-met expectations may also result in risk.
- Call adjourned at 5:40 pm Eastern
Next Steps
Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
| |||
| Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items |
Back to FHIR_Management_Group
© 2015 Health Level Seven® International
