2018-08-15 SGB Conference Call

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

back to Standards Governance Board main page

HL7 SGB Minutes

Location:
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/538465637

Date: 2018-08-15
Time: 10:00 AM Eastern
Facilitator Paul/Lorraine Note taker(s) Anne
Attendee Name


x Calvin Beebe
x Lorraine Constable, co-chair
Russ Hamm
x Tony Julian
x Paul Knapp, co-chair
Ewout Kramer
Regrets Austin Kreisler
x Wayne Kubick
x Thom Kuhn
x Rik Smithies
x Sandy Stuart
Quorum: Chair + 4

Agenda

  • Agenda review
  • Approve Minutes of 2018-07-18_SGB_Conference_Call
  • Action Items
    • Paul to contact Vocab/PA re: approval items balloting at STU in FHIR R3
      • Will then verify with Karen that the documentation on the FHIR R3 ballot STU approvals is sufficient
    • Paul to ask PH for clarification on the status of items taken out of tracker and then reconciled on spreadsheet/ask for a plan for addressing the issue
    • Paul to draft precept on artifact governance
    • Paul/Austin to draft survey regarding desire for model-driven approach where a RDAM sits at the top
    • Calvin to look for final report that came out of Structured Docs regarding maintaining value sets
    • Lorraine/Tony to follow up on RDAM minutes from last steering division call
    • Anne to dig up context for agenda item "Degree of documentation for STU vs. Normative resources"
      • Originally appeared on 2018-06-13 call as an item added to the agenda; my recollection is that it was added by Paul, but then we didn't get to it and it carried forward
  • Discussion Topics
    • Recommendation from FMG to reappoint Brian Pech and Brian Postlethwaite to FMG
    • UTG/Vocabulary Governance
      • Determine questions for Ted
      • Vocabulary governance isn't currently under SGB. With UTG rollout, we need vocabulary precepts in place.
    • Continued discussion: Tasks in step 1 of the BAM
    • Normative/continuous balloting in FHIR - determine specific questions before discussing in Baltimore
    • SGB Communication Plan
    • Large architectures coming in:
      • Evaluate PSS process to potentially provide earlier visibility
      • How should a product family-type project be documented and reviewed - is PSS enough?
      • When it affects cross-organizational methodology, PFMGs need to have a review/say - potential precept
    • CIMI-MG followup
    • Updates that we do to newer versions of FHIR that are also applicable to older versions
  • Parking Lot
    • Mapping coordination
      • Add link to Confluence page from ARB page
    • Review of project management life cycle spec to see if it talks about project and ballot scope
    • Review of MG responses to SGB query on substantive change
    • Need to make sure that SGB is accurately reflected in the GOM, and figure out what precepts should appear in the GOM
    • Review Mission and Charter
    • Drafting Shared Product Management Responsibilities
    • Technical Alignments Between Product Families
    • How groups are to interact with publishing, EST, Vocabulary, etc.
    • Precept on bringing in large projects
    • Vocabulary - review HTA material for precepts
    • Precept for adding new tools (include that WGs with a specific mandate must be involved, such as EST, Publishing, Vocabulary, etc.) - was this covered by the tooling precept we created in New Orleans?
    • BAM guidance on process for product adoption
    • Create PRECEPTS that require that it be articulated in the standards how the value sets specified within the standards respond to changes in regulation, licensing, time, etc.- to do in April/before Cologne
    • FHIR Product Director Position Description: we should 1) review further and draft feedback, then 2) map back the description to the role of FGB
    • Ownership of content
    • What precepts do we need to address PSS/profile approval processes of balloting and publishing potentially thousands of CIMI model?

Minutes

  • Agenda review
  • Approve Minutes of 2018-07-18_SGB_Conference_Call
    • MOTION to approve: Thom/Calvin
    • VOTE: All in favor
  • Paul asks about outcomes from the board retreat. Calvin: One thing is that we’re trying to get the FHIR Foundation back under the HL7 umbrella rather than having them as a separate corporate unit. It is causing confusion to the community. Also changed the mission statement a little bit. Added a clause that we need to support implementation of the standards. 40-50% of the organizational members stay for a year or two and then move on…there is greater interest in using standards than building them. We’ve never successfully figured out how to support the implementation community post-publication.
  • Action Items
    • Paul to contact Vocab/PA re: approval items balloting at STU in FHIR R3
      • Will then verify with Karen that the documentation on the FHIR R3 ballot STU approvals is sufficient
        • Carry forward
    • Paul to ask PH for clarification on the status of items taken out of tracker and then reconciled on spreadsheet/ask for a plan for addressing the issue
      • Carry forward
    • Paul to draft precept on artifact governance
      • Carry forward
    • Paul/Austin to draft survey for methodology cochairs regarding desire for model-driven approach where a RDAM sits at the top
      • ACTION: Paul to reach out to Austin regarding this item.
      • Approved the mapping project but still waiting for the approval of the other piece. Paul researching if/when steering division approved.
    • Calvin to look for final report that came out of Structured Docs regarding maintaining value sets
      • Calvin reached out to Dave who forwarded it. Reviewed link that Dave sent. Little coordination going on regarding value sets. Becomes a real issue post-publication. We likely need some governance precepts; what should WGs be responsible for? What happens to other standards when you’re bound to very specific code sets out of dynamic vocabulary systems? Should there be an annual publication of the codes to be used? Discussion over whether this fits in our space. Should raise as a topic at the joint meeting with management groups. Vocabulary should likely provide the guidance to management groups; we can back it up with precepts.
        • ACTION: Develop list of topics for management group meeting in Baltimore/add this one
    • Lorraine/Tony to follow up on RDAM minutes from last steering division call
      • Lorraine couldn’t locate the minutes of the call.
    • Anne to dig up context for agenda item "Degree of documentation for STU vs. Normative resources"
      • Originally appeared on 2018-06-13 call as an item added to the agenda; my recollection is that it was added by Paul, but then we didn't get to it and it carried forward
        • Has not resulted in anything so far.
        • ACTION: Add to parking lot
  • Discussion Topics
    • Recommendation from FMG to reappoint Brian Pech and Brian Postlethwaite to FMG
      • MOTION to recommend to TSC that Brian Pech and Brian Postlethwaite be reappointed to FMG: Lorraine/Rik
      • VOTE: All in favor
    • UTG/Vocabulary Governance
      • Determine questions for Ted
      • Vocabulary governance isn't currently under SGB. With UTG rollout, we need vocabulary precepts in place.
        • Should follow up with Ted in Baltimore. Perhaps meet with HTA for half an hour on Friday.
    • Continued discussion: Tasks in step 1 of the BAM
      • Add to top of next week’s call
    • Normative/continuous balloting in FHIR - determine specific questions before discussing in Baltimore
      • Need to determine a viable feedback mechanism and make that explicit once it’s Normative. Need to make sure that our own guidance is clear and being followed.
    • CIMI-MG followup
      • Churn continues. In addition, they are talking about publishing something using a review process other than balloting.
        • ACTION: Add to next week’s agenda
  • Carry forward:
    • SGB Communication Plan
    • Large architectures coming in:
      • Evaluate PSS process to potentially provide earlier visibility
      • How should a product family-type project be documented and reviewed - is PSS enough?
      • When it affects cross-organizational methodology, PFMGs need to have a review/say - potential precept
    • Updates that we do to newer versions of FHIR that are also applicable to older versions

Meeting Outcomes

Actions
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items

© 2018 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved