MnM Minutes CC 20070406

April 6, 2007

Attendees

Motion to accept the March 9th minutes (Lee/Austin: unanimous in favor)

Motion to accept today's agenda (Rick/Craig: unanimous in favor)

Gregg expressed concern that pre-meeting discussion for harmonization items (including objections by steward committees) are not well communicated.
MnM needs to make sure stewardship rules are appropriately documented and published.

Is there a better way to handle the representative realm items that or normally addressed at harmonization? There seems to be a perception that this is not good use of the entire harmonization group.
It was agreed that we need to discuss this further with the Vocabulary TC to identify a less person-time intensive process, but we felt that the function is important and needs to continue in some form.

Austin raised the issue of who votes at harmonization. In particular there are several SIGs and projects (e.g. Lab, Medications, and Clinical Statement) that may deserve the right to vote based on the amount of content that they are responsible for.
Austin suggested that possibly SIGs that are balloting content should be able to vote at harmonization, or possibly that OO would get more votes because of the amount of contents that its SIGs put forth.
Woody pointed out that we currently only have one international vote -- is this enough?

Create Hot Topics for:

Mead expressed concern about the lag time between harminzation proposal approval and when the updated RIM materials are available. Hopefully the vocabulary tool that Russ is working on will improve the speed with which the vocabulary changes become available.