This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
2018-08-22 SGB Conference Call
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
back to Standards Governance Board main page
| HL7 SGB Minutes |
Date: 2018-08-22 Time: 10:00 AM Eastern | ||
| Facilitator | Paul/Lorraine | Note taker(s) | Anne |
| Attendee | Name
| ||
| Calvin Beebe | |||
| x | Lorraine Constable | ||
| x | Russ Hamm | ||
| x | Tony Julian | ||
| x | Paul Knapp | ||
| Ewout Kramer | |||
| x | Austin Kreisler | ||
| x | Wayne Kubick | ||
| x | Thom Kuhn | ||
| Ken McCaslin | |||
| x | Rik Smithies | ||
| Sandy Stuart | |||
| Quorum: Chair + 4 | |||
Agenda
- Agenda review
- Approve Minutes of 2018-08-15_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 for methodology cochairs regarding desire for model-driven approach where a RDAM sits at the top
- Paul to contact Vocab/PA re: approval items balloting at STU in FHIR R3
- Discussion Topics
- Baltimore agenda
- Value set governance
- Vocabulary precepts (with HTA)
- Normative/continuous balloting in FHIR
- CIMI followup
- 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
- Baltimore agenda
- Parking Lot
- Degree of documentation for STU vs. Normative resources
- 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
- Austin and Paul will be out next week. Lorraine is available to chair.
- Approve Minutes of 2018-08-15_SGB_Conference_Call
- MOTION to approve: Thom/Austin
- VOTE: All in favor
- Austin notes that another thing that came out of the board retreat was an action item for the TSC and CTO to develop a plan for a streamlined, agile portfolio of standards by November 2018. Paul: Do they want a pruning of the artifacts? Wayne: I think the intent is a categorization of the standards - categorize and indicate adoption levels, and put in place infrastructure to start measuring that.
- 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 will ensure they address it in Baltimore. Russ will also follow up with Vocab.
- 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
- 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
- Paul drafted survey and Austin approves sending. Group reviews. Wayne suggests that they put yes or no in the subject line for ease of tabulation. Due date will be 9/14 so we can prepare to discuss in Baltimore.
- ACTION: Paul and Lorraine to send out with article
- ACTION: Anne to add link to article in the minutes
- Paul drafted survey and Austin approves sending. Group reviews. Wayne suggests that they put yes or no in the subject line for ease of tabulation. Due date will be 9/14 so we can prepare to discuss in Baltimore.
- Paul to contact Vocab/PA re: approval items balloting at STU in FHIR R3
- Discussion Topics
- Baltimore agenda
- Value set governance – Vocab and UTG are an aspect of HL7 that aren’t going through this group. Need to coordinate more closely and develop needed precepts. Ask Ted to meet with us Friday Q1. Need to decide what we do with redundant terminologies.
- Vocabulary precepts (with HTA) – consider meeting with them 10-15 min on Sunday
- Sunday: Need to tie up the BAM stuff and review methodology group survey results on overarching architecture
- Friday: Look at precepts that need to be developed, especially the one that we intended to do in Cologne from the parking lot.
- Normative/continuous maintenance in FHIR – precepts and framework
- ACTION: Anne to ask Grahame if he has a free hour to discuss sometime before the WGM
- CIMI followup
- Paul hasn’t attended a call yet, but Paul and Lorraine attended the HSPCC meeting and CIMI was showing signs of life there. SGB may need to weigh in on how we manage joint material developed by CIMI outside of HL7. Discussion over when/if we should stand up the management group. Questions remain regarding international applicability. Stan will do a presentation at the WGM on the state of CIMI.
- Baltimore 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
- Adjourned at 11:01 Eastern
Meeting Outcomes
| Actions
|
| Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items |
© 2018 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved
