This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
2017-03-01 FMG concall
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| HL7 TSC FMG Meeting Minutes Location: |
Date: 2017-03-01 Time: 4:00 PM U.S. Eastern | |
| Chair: | Note taker(s): Anne W. | |
| Quorum = chair + 4 | yes/no | |||||
| Co chairs | David Hay | x | Lloyd McKenzie | |||
| ex-officio | Woody Beeler, Dave Shaver FGB Co-chairs |
. | Wayne Kubick, CTO | |||
| Members | Members | Members | Observers/Guests | ||||
| x | Hans Buitendijk | x | Brian Postlethwaite | x | Paul Knapp | x | Anne W., scribe |
| x | Josh Mandel | John Moehrke | x | Brian Pech | |||
| x | Grahame Grieve | x | Bryn Rodes, Eric Haas | ||||
Agenda
- Roll Call
- Agenda Check
- Minutes from 2017-02-15_FMG_concall
- Action items
- New balloting process PSS
- Anne to send on to SSD-SD and T3SD
- Brian Pech to ask Andy about getting it on Publishing and EST
- Anne to update liaison spreadsheet once transition to BRR takes place - on hold for approvals
- Josh to invite one of the authors of the SOA methodology document to an upcoming call (2017-03-01)
- Pul to take publication naming convention ideas (R3 vs. STU3) to TSC
- Stale Items - Actions
- Brian Pech/Hans to reach out to US Lab/OO
- David will suggest some words to add to the summary spreadsheet to explain the columns
- New balloting process PSS
- Review Items
- GraphDefinition Resource Proposal
- Discussion Topics
- Items that need approval for change during QA period
- Dose extensions
- FMG list - not currently set to private
- Draft Product Roadmap
- Connectathon Proposal Deadline
- Items that need approval for change during QA period
- 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
- Roll Call
- Agenda Check
- MOTION to approve: Paul/Josh
- VOTE: all in favor
- Minutes from 2017-02-15_FMG_concall
- MOTION to approve: Brian Post/Paul
- VOTE: All in favor
- Action items
- New balloting process PSS
- Anne to send on to SSD-SD and T3SD
- Brian Pech to ask Andy about getting it on Publishing and EST
- PSS has been approved by EST.
- ACTION: Brian to update next week on Publishing
- Anne to update liaison spreadsheet once transition to BRR takes place - on hold for approvals
- Complete.
- ACTION: Will report back.
- Josh to invite one of the authors of the SOA methodology document to an upcoming call (2017-03-01)
- Josh invited them for 2017-03-08
- Paul to take publication naming convention ideas (R3 vs. STU3) to TSC
- Add for next week
- ACTION: Anne to add to discussion topics for 2017-03-06 call
- Stale Items - Actions
- Brian Pech/Hans to reach out to US Lab/OO
- Add for next week
- David will suggest some words to add to the summary spreadsheet to explain the columns
- Add for next week
- Brian Pech/Hans to reach out to US Lab/OO
- New balloting process PSS
- Review Items
- GraphDefinition Resource Proposal
- Group reviews and discusses. Not present in the ballot. Purpose is to define a collection of interrelated resources as a pattern. Lloyd will add PA, CDS, OO, and FM as interested groups. Add a to-do about reverse links. Will be adding capability to do reverse includes.
- MOTION to approve: Brian Post/Josh
- VOTE: all in favor
- MOTION to include as draft in STU3: Brian Post/Josh
- VOTE: All in favor
- Group reviews and discusses. Not present in the ballot. Purpose is to define a collection of interrelated resources as a pattern. Lloyd will add PA, CDS, OO, and FM as interested groups. Add a to-do about reverse links. Will be adding capability to do reverse includes.
- RequestGroup Resource Proposal
- Group reviews. Elements have already been through connectathon and ballot. Is now being pushed out as a standalone item.
- MOTION to approve: Paul/Brian Post
- VOTE: all in favor
- Brian Pech leaves.
- Group reviews. Elements have already been through connectathon and ballot. Is now being pushed out as a standalone item.
- ServiceDefinition Resource Proposal
- Bryn reviews with group. Brian Post isn't sure the name is accurate. Perhaps APIDefinition? It is already in the spec. Given where we're at we shouldn't rename at this point. We want it to be STU level because there's are IGs and projects using it that we want to be STU status. If we kept this one as draft, would that prevent IGs being STU that otherwise would be? Discussion over FMM level.
- Decision to hold off until we can figure out what it will look like. Just needs to be in the publication.
- Bryn reviews with group. Brian Post isn't sure the name is accurate. Perhaps APIDefinition? It is already in the spec. Given where we're at we shouldn't rename at this point. We want it to be STU level because there's are IGs and projects using it that we want to be STU status. If we kept this one as draft, would that prevent IGs being STU that otherwise would be? Discussion over FMM level.
- GraphDefinition Resource Proposal
- Discussion Topics
- Items that need approval for change during QA period
- What are our rules going to be for permitting change?
- FMG approves substantive changes, but Grahame wants to control timing of applying the changes to avoid repeating work.
- What kinds of changes are we willing to accept? Grahame willing to accept through 2017-03-15. Anything other than spelling and grammar at this point needs review. Discussion over changes to examples - Lloyd expects quite a few to come in. Process could be make changes, make sure it builds locally, create a patch file, and send to Grahame and Lloyd.
- Are we comfortable allowing substantive change, and if yes, what is the criteria? Grahame: if it's driven by QA requirements, he'd prefer that we approve it. As far as other changes, would hate to encourage them. Three options: 1) We can say if you didn't make it in, you can't apply the change; 2) We allow changes that impact FMM levels and other that we think are going to be advantageous to implementers; 3) We don't allow change but we waive certain QA rules to allow them to be FMM1 or higher; top level would be FMM3.
- Group decides that we're willing to listen to proposals but we're not going to make a blanket decision on what we'll reject or endorse. Grahame: Can we approve changes on Zulip instead of waiting for the call? We have 9 members plus Wayne (who won't vote). We would approve with 5 affirmatives.
- If people break the rules of changing anything other than spelling and grammar, their committer privileges will be revoked.
- To ask FMG for approval for a change, they can send email to FMGcontact with link to tracker item.
- ACTION: Grahame will consult with the others doing technical QA to see what they think of restricting changes to examples.
- What are our rules going to be for permitting change?
- Items that need approval for change during QA period
- No time to cover on this call:
- Dose extensions
- FMG list - not currently set to private
- Draft Product Roadmap
- Connectathon Proposal Deadline
- Reports
- Connectathon management (David/Brian)
- FGB –
- MnM –
- FMG Liaisons –
- Adjourned at 5:35 pm Eastern
Next Steps
| Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date) | |||
| Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items |
Back to FHIR_Management_Group
© 2017 Health Level Seven® International
