This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
20161005 FMG concall
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| HL7 TSC FMG Meeting Minutes Location: |
Date: 2016-10-05 Time: 4:00 PM U.S. Eastern | |
| 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 |
. | Wayne Kubick, CTO | |||
| Members | Members | Members | Observers/Guests | ||||
| Hans Buitendijk | x | Brian Postlethwaite | x | Paul Knapp | x | Anne W., scribe | |
| x | Josh Mandel | John Moehrke | x | Brian Pech | |||
| x | Grahame Grieve | x | Mario Hyland, Richard Ettema, Eric Haas, Christol Green | ||||
Agenda
- Roll Call
- Agenda Check
- Minutes from 20160928_FMG_concall
- Action items
- Lloyd to send tracker to Andy Stechishin to be added to tooling list
- Anne to ask if Brian Pech can forward FMG comments regarding proposed extension review process to US Realm
- Hans will draft a formal policy for endorsement and distribution regarding extensions and profiles to a resource being accepted by the WG that owns the resource before it can go to ballot
- Lloyd to begin draft of PSS regarding the proposed new balloting process
- David to draft email and post on lists to solicit volunteer to be track lead for Patient to work with Richard and David
- Review Items
- Pharmacy FHIR Maturity Project - revised
- Ballot items
- Discussion Topics
- Additional expectations regarding criteria for normative
- Any updates from WGM?
- 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
- Agenda Check
- MOTION to approve: Josh/Brian Post
- VOTE: all in favor
- Minutes from 20160928_FMG_concall
- MOTION to approve: Brian Pech/Brian Post
- VOTE: all in favor
- Action items
- Lloyd to send tracker to Andy Stechishin to be added to tooling list
- Complete
- Anne to ask if Brian Pech can forward FMG comments regarding proposed extension review process to US Realm
- Leave for next week
- Hans will draft a formal policy for endorsement and distribution regarding extensions and profiles to a resource being accepted by the WG that owns the resource before it can go to ballot
- Leave for next week
- Lloyd to begin draft of PSS regarding the proposed new balloting process
- Leave for next week - working out details
- David to draft email and post on lists to solicit volunteer to be track lead for Patient to work with Richard and David
- Complete. Several responses have been received. Discussion over bandwidth/experience level of potential volunteers. Recommendation that Ron Shapiro will lead Patient Track with Richard providing support in test infrastructure and Corey Spears to continue to work on other tracks that he's already been involved in. Will figure out an appropriate role for Russ. Richard asks about his role going forward; Lloyd states he'll continue in the role he has been with additional work coordinating with Ron and David specific to the Patient track and what we would like to see the tracks evolve to using Patient as a guinea pig. Mario: We would like the support of the FMG to put a communication out during or prior to the Connectathon to ensure their conformance statements are present and valid. Lloyd: Is that as part of this trial for Patient or something we need from all of the participants? Brian Post: It's more part of the enhancements we discussed last week. Mario: It's good hygiene in general. Perhaps there could be a blog post about managing conformance statements. It promotes the progress of the maturity of the Connectathon. Paul: Are conformance statements invalid as they are, or are they insufficient in that they haven't kept up with changes? Mario: Richard could come back with an analysis. 33% of them are invalid. Lloyd: Some people show up without anything so asking them to have a conformance statement beforehand isn't reasonable. Discussion regarding servers vs. clients and whether clients must or should have a conformance statement. Grahame: The client, when it connects to the server, could request a conformance statement. Brian Post: As it stands, the language is clients should not must have a conformance statement. Lloyd: Can we include a statement that the assertion of FHIR conformance in the absence of a conformance statement is meaningless? Paul suggests replacing meaningless with unsupported. Will continue the conversation further at a later date.
- ACTION: Grahame to email volunteers with decisions on volunteer placement
- Richard will come to next FMG with statistics on conformance statements
- Complete. Several responses have been received. Discussion over bandwidth/experience level of potential volunteers. Recommendation that Ron Shapiro will lead Patient Track with Richard providing support in test infrastructure and Corey Spears to continue to work on other tracks that he's already been involved in. Will figure out an appropriate role for Russ. Richard asks about his role going forward; Lloyd states he'll continue in the role he has been with additional work coordinating with Ron and David specific to the Patient track and what we would like to see the tracks evolve to using Patient as a guinea pig. Mario: We would like the support of the FMG to put a communication out during or prior to the Connectathon to ensure their conformance statements are present and valid. Lloyd: Is that as part of this trial for Patient or something we need from all of the participants? Brian Post: It's more part of the enhancements we discussed last week. Mario: It's good hygiene in general. Perhaps there could be a blog post about managing conformance statements. It promotes the progress of the maturity of the Connectathon. Paul: Are conformance statements invalid as they are, or are they insufficient in that they haven't kept up with changes? Mario: Richard could come back with an analysis. 33% of them are invalid. Lloyd: Some people show up without anything so asking them to have a conformance statement beforehand isn't reasonable. Discussion regarding servers vs. clients and whether clients must or should have a conformance statement. Grahame: The client, when it connects to the server, could request a conformance statement. Brian Post: As it stands, the language is clients should not must have a conformance statement. Lloyd: Can we include a statement that the assertion of FHIR conformance in the absence of a conformance statement is meaningless? Paul suggests replacing meaningless with unsupported. Will continue the conversation further at a later date.
- Lloyd to send tracker to Andy Stechishin to be added to tooling list
- Review Items
- Pharmacy FHIR Maturity Project - revised
- Initial focus will be in dispense and administration. Lloyd asks if there will be duplication of profiles if these are US profiles. Either you would define profiles for resources not yet touched by Argonaut/DAF, or you would be working through Argonaut/DAF to update the existing profiles, or you would be creating profiles with a narrower scope.
- Eric will come back with answers next week
- ACTION: Add update to next week
- Ballot items
- 9837 Resolution: For this release, we will document a state machine for the Request, Event, and Definition Patterns. We will see if that meets the needs or if further resource-specific documentation is necessary.
- MOTION to approve: Josh/Grahame
- Brian Post wants to make sure that it's clear that it's not for a general state machine for use everywhere. Lloyd adds "Will note that it reflects the "typical" state machine for all resources following that pattern, but that some resources may diverge (and where that occurs, it will be documented."
- VOTE: all in favor
- 10679: Resolution to change to typo. Grahame will fix the link to the correct location for the Delphi/Pascal repository.
- 10745: Referred to Grahame
- 12150: Lloyd will reach out to Melva to confirm why this came to FMG
- 11468: Might be useful to put together a dummy HTML page as templates for table styles.
- Do we want to recommend all modules have quick table of short links as well as detailed links with aliases? Paul: When sections are used it's good to have them consistent in appearance; does the presence and ordering need to be the same? Uses Financial as an example. Lloyd: List of use cases come first, but not sure it's easy to describe some use cases as concisely as is done in Financial.
- Resolution: Will ask if Thomas L. can take a quick look at styles used throughout the spec and put together a summary page of "recommended" styles, along with guidance on their use (tables, lists, notes, headings, etc.). Brian and Paul will work to define a standard approach to sections and links across the "modules."
- ACTION: Lloyd to contact Thomas
- ACTION: Brian and Paul to define standard approach
- 9837 Resolution: For this release, we will document a state machine for the Request, Event, and Definition Patterns. We will see if that meets the needs or if further resource-specific documentation is necessary.
- Pharmacy FHIR Maturity Project - revised
- Discussion Topics
- Paul: In Workflow meeting, noticed that 3 or 4 out of 50 people had actually read the section. We assume that when it comes to balloting that if people aren't expressing a negative that silence is positive. It also means people didn't review it. How do we measure that? Is a problem with aggregate ballots. Lloyd: One of the QA criteria is that you have to have had at least 10 comments on your resource and made substantive change as a result, but lack of broad review at ballot is always a concern. Paul: Is there a good way to measure it? Lloyd: We could gather metrics of page views.
- ACTION: Anne to add to agenda for next week
- Paul: In Workflow meeting, noticed that 3 or 4 out of 50 people had actually read the section. We assume that when it comes to balloting that if people aren't expressing a negative that silence is positive. It also means people didn't review it. How do we measure that? Is a problem with aggregate ballots. Lloyd: One of the QA criteria is that you have to have had at least 10 comments on your resource and made substantive change as a result, but lack of broad review at ballot is always a concern. Paul: Is there a good way to measure it? Lloyd: We could gather metrics of page views.
- Additional expectations regarding criteria for normative
- Add to next week
- Additional expectations regarding criteria for normative
- Adjourned at 5:33 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
