This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
20180515 US Realm SC WGM
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
back to US_Realm_Steering_Committee
back to US_Realm_Steering_Committee_Conference_Calls
| US Realm Steering Committee Call Agenda/Minutes Location: Saal 2, Heumarkt |
Date: 2018-05-14 Time: 7:00 AM | ||
| Co-Chairs | Ed/Brett | Note taker(s) | Anne |
| Attendee / Name | |||||
| x | Calvin Beebe | Keith Boone | Hans Buitendijk | ||
| Lorraine Constable | Johnathan Coleman | x | Ed Hammond | ||
| Tony Julian | x | Paul Knapp | Austin Kreisler | ||
| x | Brett Marquard | Ken McCaslin | Nancy Orvis | ||
| Brian Pech | x | Wayne Kubick | x | Christol Green | |
| Sandra Stuart | . | Pat Van Dyke | . | Craig Parker | |
| Danielle Friend | . | Eric Haas | . | Jenni Syed | |
| Steve Posnak | . | David Susanto | . | John Roberts | |
| Visitor/ Name | |||||
| x | Lenel James | ||||
| Quorum: Chair + 7 | |||||
Agenda
Administrivia
- Agenda review
- Action Items
- Review Items
- TBD
- Discussion:
- Review of any outstanding issues
Minutes
- Not quorate
- Discussion over composition of group. Discussion over people who do not regularly attend. Should we have attendance guidelines? Will send a note to people who have not been attending to see if they have continued interest. Calvin thinks we should have minimum participation of 60% of calls. Look at TSC M&C for verbiage. Wayne: We need to figure out which interest groups should be represented here.
- US Core IG
- Need to get it on our agenda from a planning standpoint - when are we going to adjust it, and how? Discussion over doing it next summer and having a winter ballot. Makes sense to do it after a new release of FHIR is published.
- MOTION that we seek to schedule updates of US Core after the publication of a new FHIR release.
- ACTION: Add vote to future agenda when we're quorate.
- Need to get it on our agenda from a planning standpoint - when are we going to adjust it, and how? Discussion over doing it next summer and having a winter ballot. Makes sense to do it after a new release of FHIR is published.
- Ed proposes that FHIR is the standard of the future, and any projects that start new should start with FHIR instead of CDA. The cost of doing things twice and then mapping is unnecessary. Ed is interested in others' opinions. Paul: In the global sense that's logical; that being said, we can't choose it, can only encourage/support. Discussion over how life cycle of standards relates to this issue. Ed clarifies that any new work that has not previously existed, the recommendation is that it should be done in FHIR. Developing something in FHIR and CDA in tandem is too complicated.
- Version control in FHIR - Lenel here with a concern regarding version management and quality in FHIR. Calvin suggests that this is a TSC issue. Lenel's concern is the discussion of versioning are purely technical, but the artifact talks about quality care models and care planning - from a business standpoint, what are the operational impacts of versions? Brett suggests that Lenel put this up on Zulip for discussion.
- ACTION: Anne to send out Mission and Charter for review on next call
Meeting Outcomes
| Actions
|
