20151214 FGB concall

HL7 TSC FGB Meeting Minutes Location: call 770-657-9270 using code 985371# GoToMeeting ID: 136-494-157		Date: 2015-mm-dd Time: 4:00 PM U.S. Eastern
Facilitator:		Note taker(s): Anne W.

Quorum = Chair plus 2				yes/no
Co-Chair/CTO		Members
	Woody Beeler	x	Lorraine Constable		Grahame Grieve		David Hay
	Dave Shaver		Ewout Kramer	x	Cecil Lynch (ArB)	x	Lloyd McKenzie (FMG)
	John Quinn	x	Calvin Beebe	.
observers/guests			Austin Kreisler
			Anne W., scribe

Agenda

• Roll call -
• Agenda Review
• Approve minutes of 20151207 FGB concall
• Action Item review:
• Discussion Topics:
  • PSSs for FHIR Projects
• FMG update -
• Methodology update-
• Review precepts, associated governance points and risks
• Next steps: Define and Resource other Governance processes.

Minutes

• May not reach quorum today
• May need to appoint backup co-chair at next quorate meeting
• Could add third co-chair seat by updating M&C
• Question around PSS creation for FHIR Path.
  • Paul thought there should be a PSS; Grahame disagreed. Lloyd: As conceptualized, it was being defined as a means by which we are formally defining mappings within FHIR. Created as being FHIR specific for use within FHIR spec. Now there are questions about it being made more generic. It may possibly be treated as a separate artifacts. If that happens, it would need its own PSS.
  • Lorraine: One purpose of a PSS is to let the community know what's going on to see if they may want to participate. Lloyd states it was created in 10 days. It's out there and everyone can participate. Creating a PSS every time we have an idea for something we want to try out is a nonstarter. PSS is something we use when we're going to ballot an artifact. Calvin: That's not the only time to use a PSS. There are non-ballotable PSSs out there. Sometimes a PSS is created just so people know something is being worked on. Lloyd: Yes, if you're going to be working on something for a period of months, that makes sense. Calvin: Time is not the issue. Lorraine: Work can be ongoing during the creation of the PSS - it doesn't have to stop. Lorraine: So all of the work of FHIR infrastructure happens under one PSS? Lloyd: We've chatted with Dave Hamill and he states it is up to us what kind of level of granularity we want for PSS creation.
  • Lorraine: The question here is what does the TSC want to see? Hasn't been decided yet - we just need to continue the discussion.
  • Lloyd: The creation of a PSS is a tax. The work is not going to change its pace, so it will be long done before the PSS gets passed. Content does go out for general review and discussion with notifications to the FHIR list. Lorraine: PSS opens up another communication path.
  • Lloyd: TSC should review what constitutes sufficient difference to justify having a new PSS, and make clear at what point in the process is creating a PSS reasonable.
  • Conversation over agility vs. PSS process which is laborious, especially when you're doing something as a trial. Lorraine: when it becomes more than that, you need to start communicating.
  • Lloyd: I'm in favor of making sure a broad audience knows what's going on, but we also need to allow things to get to a level of readiness for discussion before that occurs. Going for approval is taking a risk of having your project changed. Calvin: Yes, but you can also have a project with different phases.
  • From an agile perspective, software developers who are used to working in an agile atmosphere find the PSS process heavy and bloated. It is our preferred mechanism for communication, but it might not be the only way that a WG can communicate what it's doing. Part of the challenge is that the PSS is serving multiple masters. Awareness, TSC control of the direction of organization, balancing work, preparation for ballot, ANSI communication, broad community communication. For a project like this where there won't be a ballot and TSC control is unnecessary, it's really just a vehicle for a heads up. PSS process is a bit heavy for that. Calvin: The PSS-lite addresses this - only a few fields are required. Lloyd: But all of the fields are still there. Calvin: But this is changing a precept on how we notify people of work. Lloyd: As the tsc looks at what should happen here, they may want to consider whether PSS is the only or best way for a WG to surface different kinds of work. Calvin: It is the current process. Lloyd: Yes, but we should examine that as we consider these guidelines. Is there a way to streamline the process for something like this project, where it's not a separate product but is something that might reasonably have broad interest but the overhead of the PSS process doesn't make sense.
• Adjourned at 4:52 pm Eastern

Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)

Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items 20151221 FGB concall

Back to FHIR_Governance_Board

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