This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
<meta name="googlebot" content="noindex">

MnM Harmonization Notes April 2008

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Tuesday, April 1, 2008


  • In person: Nelson (MnM), Van Hentenryck, Klein (Vocab), Seppala (PA), Walker (RCRIM), Loyd (OO), Hausam (Lab), George, Raiford, Parker (CDS), Stewart (INM), McKenzie (International), Beeler
  • Online: Kreisler, Dolin (SD), Glover (Pharmacy), James, Eckerson (PHER), De Jong

Brief Summary of Harmonization Results

ID File Name Result
010102 2008Apr_HARM_PROPOSAL_RIM_MEDREC_netherlands_2_SubsAdmin as Procedure_20080306041729.doc Approved
020102 2008Apr_HARM_COVERPAGE_VOCAB_INM_grahame_grieve_IdentifierReliability.VER definition_20080302063228.doc Approved
020103 2008Apr_HARM_COVERPAGE_VOCAB_INM_grahame_grieve_PostalAddressUse.NameRepresentationUse definition_20080302183210.doc Approved
020104 2008Apr_HARM_COVERPAGE_VOCAB_INM_grahame_grieve_EntityNamePartType.SFX definition_20080302183156.doc Approved
020105 2008Apr_HARM_COVERPAGE_VOCAB_MNM_grahame_grieve_UpdateMode_20080302195151.doc Approved
020106 2008Apr_HARM_COVERPAGE_VOCAB_INM_grahame_grieve_NullFlavor_20080302195133.doc Approved
020107 2008Apr_HARM_COVERPAGE_VOCAB_INM_grahame_grieve_EntityNamePartQualifier definition_20080302183140.doc Approved
020108 2008Apr_HARM_COVERPAGE_VOCAB_INM_grahame_grieve_EntityNameUse definition_20080302185414.doc Approved
020109 2008Apr_HARM_COVERPAGE_VOCAB_INM_grahame_grieve_PostalAddressUse.SRCH definition_20080302185254.doc Approved
020113 2008Apr_HARM_COVERPAGE_VOCAB_INM_grahame_grieve_MediaType.PlainText definition_20080302062344.doc Approved
020121 2008Apr_HARM_PROPOSAL_VOCAB_LAB_robert_hausam_x_LabSpecimenCollectionProviders _20080316235831.doc Approved
020122 2008Apr_HARM_COVERPAGE_VOCAB_LAB_robert_hausam_PartOfWholeRelationship_20080302232915.doc Withdrawn
020123 2008Apr_HARM_PROPOSAL_VOCAB_LAB_robert_hausam_BatteryClassDefinition_20080316224613.doc Approved
030100 2008Apr_HARM_COVERPAGE_VOCAB_RCRIM_g_schadow_BasisOfStrength_20080303003543.doc Approved
030101 2008Apr_HARM_PROPOSAL_VOCAB_NoCommittee_g_schadow_ActClassCodes_20080316105135.doc Rejected
030102 2008Apr_HARM_PROPOSAL_VOCAB_RCRIM_g_schadow_ActCode_20080316105048.doc Duplicate of 030101
030103 2008Apr_HARM_PROPOSAL_VOCAB_RCRIM_g_schadow_TherapeuticEquivalenceRoleCode_20080316115132.doc Tabled
030104 2008Apr_HARM_PROPOSAL_VOCAB_RCRIM_g_schadow_ActRelationshipDocument_20080316110424.doc Approved
030105 2008Apr_HARM_COVERPAGE_VOCAB_RCRIM_g_schadow_ActRelationshipDocument_20080303002827.wbk Duplicate of 030105

Other Notes

The issue of value set management arose. The following was informally agreed to:

  • Value sets that do not have adequate definitions cannot be changed.
  • HL7 will capture a responsible organization for every value set created.

Wednesday, April 2, 2008


  • In person: Dale Nelson, Ted Klein, Gregg Seppala, Mead Walker, Patrick Loyd, Rob Hausam, Lloyd McKenzie, Joyce George, Robin Raiford, Sandy Stuart, Sara Ryan, Woody Beeler, Craig Parker
  • Online: Patricia Grimes, Ioana Singureanu, Russ Hamm, Austin Kreisler


  • How can we make it easier for committees to submit proposals?
    • Wizards were discussed. It was generally agreed that they can be helpful, but they are seldom capable of handling the more difficult cases.
    • There was discussion about creating several different submission forms, tailored to assisting with the submission of different types of proposals.
    • There was discussion about more human assistance from HQ in the submission processing (triage, checking for complexity, etc.).
  • How can we make it easier to process the approved proposals in a timely fashion?
    • The better form that the original submission is in, the easier it is to process.
    • More structured submission mechanisms lead to more automated processing of the changes.


  • Eventual goal is a "tool" (or suite thereof) that allows editing of vocabulary content by the membership, that can then be validated, summarized and applied to the vocabulary after approval and builds upon the established base of capability.
  • First baby-step: Develop a set of simple forms with surrounding instructions and style guides for additions or changes of:
    • code systems
    • coded concepts
    • concept domains
    • value set definitions
    • context binding statements
  • Use the ballot's HTML representation as a starting point.
  • The surrounding instructions will define dependencies between the forms.
  • The forms are positioned as aids to the committees in preparing and "debating" their proposals. They can also feed the update process directly, whether manual (now), or tool-based (future).
  • Bind the forms into the current coversheet/proposal documents, using a common proposal identifier.

Tutorial at the Phoenix WGM (Q4 Sunday)

  • Audiences:
    • Committee designer seeking to extend our models (RIM, class codes, etc.)
    • Committee designer seeking to produce a finer grained constraint than they can find in the vocabulary -- including domain specific constraints and value sets.
    • Users or realms requiring a content binding to a defined value set (including, over time, a value set defined and maintained external to HL7, but that supports a CTS API).
    • Implementor trying to determine what codes, value sets, etc., they need in order to build and instance.