This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
2017-10-11 SGB Conference Call
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
back to Standards Governance Board main page
| HL7 SGB Minutes |
Date: 2017-10-11 Time: 10:00 AM Eastern | ||
| Facilitator | Paul/Calvin | Note taker(s) | Anne |
| Attendee | Name
| ||
| x | Calvin Beebe | ||
| Lorraine Constable | |||
| x | Russ Hamm | ||
| Tony Julian | |||
| x | Paul Knapp | ||
| x | Austin Kreisler | ||
| Wayne Kubick | |||
| x | Thom Kuhn | ||
| Ken McCaslin | |||
| x | Rik Smithies | ||
| x | Sandy Stuart | ||
| Quorum: Chair + 4 | |||
Agenda
- Agenda review
- Approve Minutes of 2017-10-04_SGB_Conference_Call
- Action Items
- Review GOM with respect to where SGB and precepts should be reflected
- Recommend to TSC to work with CTO on architecture and tooling strategy to support the work of the committees in following the precepts
- Schedule joint meeting with FGB for precept review
- Invite Tooling to October SGB call
- What week would we like to do this?
- Ask Vocab to approve a motion that it was the WG’s intention in R3 for the Expansion profile to be balloted as STU. If PA has not documented approval, send them the same message
- Paul to verify with Karen that the documentation on the FHIR R3 ballot STU approvals is sufficient
- Rik to edit the remaining items in the product life cycle document for review
- Precept Development
- How groups are to interact with Publishing, EST, Vocabulary, etc. WGs
- Engaging the implementer community in the consideration of changes as artifacts mature
- Engagement in large cross-organizational projects
- How management groups document, enforce, and manage the precepts regarding inter-WG participation in artifact creation
- Management groups must establish in writing a refinement of examples that adhere to the definition of substantive change that apply to their product family. Must monitor, audit, and measure conformance to the definition of substantive change.
- The addition of new tools (with EST)
- Discussion Topics
- Finish review/vote on product life cycle document
- Nomination of Andrew Statler to CDAMG
- Finish review of mixed ballot content precept
- Precept implementation strategy
- Backwards compatibility consistency and definition across families
- Parking Lot
- Paul to draft a precept on state machine alignment
- Draft precept on use of new tools/coordinate with Wayne
- Review Publishing M&C updates regarding dual roles
- Write/post precept on vitality assessment
- How do we deal with making sure that WGs involve those whose content domain they’re touching? (CIMI and Pharmacy and Lab models)
- Review Mission and Charter
- PSS approval process: managing unresponsive parties - propose new precept to TSC
- Handling situations where two documents come out of one project
- FHIR Product Director Position Description: we should 1) review further and draft feedback, then 2) map back the description to the role of FGB
- Drafting Shared Product Management Responsibilities
- Vocabulary precepts
- General precepts
- Precept around training WGs in CDA methodology and management principles
- Levels of standards
- Separation of concerns
- Ownership of content
- ISM
- Ask methodology groups to define how the definition of substantive change applies to their product family; management groups must then operationalize
Minutes
- Agenda review
- Approve Minutes of 2017-10-04_SGB_Conference_Call
- MOTION to approve: Calvin/Rik
- VOTE: Thom abstains. Remaining in favor.
- Action Items
- Review CDAMG resume for payer position - Linda Michaelsen and Andrew Statler
- No resume for Andrew, although he was on the original list.
- Reviewed Linda Michaelsen's resume.
- MOTION to recommend appointing Linda and Andrew to CDAMG: Austin/Thom
- VOTE: All in favor
- Recommendation is to CTO, who will recommend to TSC to appoint. Discussion over terms.
- ACTION: Anne to invite Linda and Andrew to Friday's CDAMG call as provisional candidates awaiting confirmation from the TSC
- ACTION: Anne to alert Wayne to bring to TSC
- Review GOM with respect to where SGB and precepts should be reflected
- Recommend to TSC to work with CTO on architecture and tooling strategy to support the work of the committees in following the precepts
- Schedule joint meeting with FGB for precept review
- Invite Tooling to October SGB call
- What week would we like to do this?
- ACTION: Anne to invite EST cochairs, David, and Laura to 2017-10-25 call
- What week would we like to do this?
- Ask Vocab to approve a motion that it was the WG’s intention in R3 for the Expansion profile to be balloted as STU. If PA has not documented approval, send them the same message
- Paul to verify with Karen that the documentation on the FHIR R3 ballot STU approvals is sufficient
- Rik to edit the remaining items in the product life cycle document for review
- Review CDAMG resume for payer position - Linda Michaelsen and Andrew Statler
- Precept Development
- How groups are to interact with Publishing, EST, Vocabulary, etc. WGs
- Engaging the implementer community in the consideration of changes as artifacts mature
- Engagement in large cross-organizational projects
- How management groups document, enforce, and manage the precepts regarding inter-WG participation in artifact creation
- Management groups must establish in writing a refinement of examples that adhere to the definition of substantive change that apply to their product family. Must monitor, audit, and measure conformance to the definition of substantive change.
- The addition of new tools (with EST)
- Discussion Topics
- Finish review/vote on product life cycle document
- Need precept on life cycle management as well. Worked on precept. Discussion over how to handle groups that are going away. Suggestion that this be factored into WG health. Need to take as discussion item to TSC regarding how it would be managed. Is there value in applying this to all products? Is it a shall or a should?
- MOTION to send Life Cycle Management Strategy to TSC for review/approval: Calvin/Rik
- VOTE: All in favor
- ACTION: Anne to add to TSC agenda
- Need precept on life cycle management as well. Worked on precept. Discussion over how to handle groups that are going away. Suggestion that this be factored into WG health. Need to take as discussion item to TSC regarding how it would be managed. Is there value in applying this to all products? Is it a shall or a should?
- Finish review of mixed ballot content precept
- Add to next week
- Precept implementation strategy
- Add to next week
- Backwards compatibility consistency and definition across families
- Add to next week
- Finish review/vote on product life cycle document
Meeting Outcomes
| Actions
|
| Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items |
© 2017 Health Level Seven® International. All rights re
