This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "20160607 arb minutes"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (→Minutes) |
|||
| (4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
|- | |- | ||
| width="10%" colspan="1" align="right"|'''Facilitator''' | | width="10%" colspan="1" align="right"|'''Facilitator''' | ||
| − | | width="35%" colspan="1" align="left"|[[User:Ajulian | Julian, Tony]] | + | | width="35%" colspan="1" align="left"|[[User:Ajulian | Julian, Tony]] |
| width="10%" colspan="1" align="right"|'''Note taker(s)''' | | width="10%" colspan="1" align="right"|'''Note taker(s)''' | ||
| − | | width="30%" colspan="1" align="left"|[[User:Ajulian | Julian, Tony]] | + | | width="30%" colspan="1" align="left"|[[User:Ajulian | Julian, Tony]] |
|- | |- | ||
| border="4" cellpadding="1" colspan="4" style="background:#f0f0f0;"| | | border="4" cellpadding="1" colspan="4" style="background:#f0f0f0;"| | ||
| Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
|colspan="2"|'''Affiliation''' | |colspan="2"|'''Affiliation''' | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |X||Bond,Andy |
|colspan="2"|NEHTA | |colspan="2"|NEHTA | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |X||[[User:Lconstab |Constable, Lorraine]] |
|colspan="2"|Constable Consulting Inc. | |colspan="2"|Constable Consulting Inc. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |R||Dagnall, Bo |
|colspan="2"|HP Enterprise Services | |colspan="2"|HP Enterprise Services | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
|colspan="2"| AEGIS | |colspan="2"| AEGIS | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |X||[[User:Ajulian | Julian, Tony]] |
|colspan="2"|Mayo Clinic | |colspan="2"|Mayo Clinic | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
|colspan="2"| Pknapp Consulting | |colspan="2"| Pknapp Consulting | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |X||Kubick, Wayne |
|colspan="2"|HL7 CTO | |colspan="2"|HL7 CTO | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |X||[[User:Ployd|Loyd, Patrick ]] |
|colspan="2"| ICode Solutions | |colspan="2"| ICode Solutions | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Line 74: | Line 74: | ||
|colspan="2"|Accenture | |colspan="2"|Accenture | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |R||Milosevic, Zoran |
|colspan="2"|Deontik Pty Ltd | |colspan="2"|Deontik Pty Ltd | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |X||[[User:Astechishin| Stechishin,Andy]] |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
|colspan="2"|CANA Software and Service Ltd. | |colspan="2"|CANA Software and Service Ltd. | ||
|- | |- | ||
|colspan="4" align="center"|Guests | |colspan="4" align="center"|Guests | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |X|| Solbrig, Harold |
| − | |colspan="2"| | + | |colspan="2"| Mayo Clinic |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |X||Lyle, Jay |
| − | |colspan="2"| | + | |colspan="2"|Ockham Information Services LLC |
| + | |- | ||
| + | |X||Fisher, Karl | ||
| + | |colspan="2"|Dell Services | ||
|- | |- | ||
|.|| | |.|| | ||
| Line 111: | Line 111: | ||
|} | |} | ||
| + | ===Minutes=== | ||
#Agenda approval | #Agenda approval | ||
#* Agenda approved by concensus | #* Agenda approved by concensus | ||
| Line 116: | Line 117: | ||
#*'''Motion''' to approve (Andy/Andy B) | #*'''Motion''' to approve (Andy/Andy B) | ||
#*'''Vote''' 4-0-3 | #*'''Vote''' 4-0-3 | ||
| − | #CIMI | + | #Methodology (60 minutes) |
| − | #*Jay Lyle: Not a product - product models and other discoveries. | + | #*[http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/arbgeneral/scmsvn/?action=browse&path=%2F%2Acheckout%2A%2Ftrunk%2FHL7%2520Project%2520Scope%2520Statement%2520v2015.1_CIMI_POC_d20160511.docx CIMI Proof of concept] |
| − | #*Lorraine: It is not clear if it is a mapping artifact, new models - what are the actual artifacts. | + | #**Jay Lyle: Not a product - product models and other discoveries. |
| − | #*Jay Lyle: New artifacts | + | #**Lorraine: It is not clear if it is a mapping artifact, new models - what are the actual artifacts. |
| − | #*Wayne: Checkbox for logical models | + | #**Jay Lyle: New artifacts |
| − | #*Lorraine: Not the same as the traditional HL7 Logical models | + | #**Wayne: Checkbox for logical models |
| − | #*Jay Lyle: Not sure what Logical Models means: | + | #**Lorraine: Not the same as the traditional HL7 Logical models |
| − | #*Wayne: Lots of models. | + | #**Jay Lyle: Not sure what Logical Models means: |
| − | #*Harold: General sense they are logical models. Rest of products have formal meaning and definition. | + | #**Wayne: Lots of models. |
| − | #*Tony: New product? | + | #**Harold: General sense they are logical models. Rest of products have formal meaning and definition. |
| − | #*Harold: Not new to us - new from the HL7 Perspective | + | #**Tony: New product? |
| − | #*Jay Lyle: New product, but not new product definition. An artifact that defines what a CIMI definition is. | + | #**Harold: Not new to us - new from the HL7 Perspective |
| − | #*Andy S: CQL is a new product. | + | #**Jay Lyle: New product, but not new product definition. An artifact that defines what a CIMI definition is. |
| − | #*Lorraine: Subject to ARB review. So we don't proliferate what we have already done. | + | #**Andy S: CQL is a new product. |
| − | #*Lorraine: The product is not new to CIMI, but to HL7. | + | #**Lorraine: Subject to ARB review. So we don't proliferate what we have already done. |
| − | #*Jay Lyle: Good question. | + | #**Lorraine: The product is not new to CIMI, but to HL7. |
| − | #*Andy S: That is what we are all struggling with. | + | #**Jay Lyle: Good question. |
| − | #*Jay Lyle: If there is not an old project model then it is a new one. Doing it now but not as a project. | + | #**Andy S: That is what we are all struggling with. |
| − | #*Lorraine: This project is part of doing that definition. Granularity level of existing models is not the same as the level of the CIMI models. | + | #**Jay Lyle: If there is not an old project model then it is a new one. Doing it now but not as a project. |
| − | #*Jay Lyle: Just seeing what fits together. | + | #**Lorraine: This project is part of doing that definition. Granularity level of existing models is not the same as the level of the CIMI models. |
| − | #*Lorraine: If we said it was a new product what actions does that decision drive? | + | #**Jay Lyle: Just seeing what fits together. |
| − | #*Jay Lyle: I don't have scope or authority to define CIMI within the scope of the project. Should have a discussion between ARB/CIMI/MnM. | + | #**Lorraine: If we said it was a new product what actions does that decision drive? |
| − | #*Andy B: Is a collection of logical models a new product family? It is work to create a collection, not a single model. This may be a product family. In effect the CIMI logical models are part of an independent product line. | + | #**Jay Lyle: I don't have scope or authority to define CIMI within the scope of the project. Should have a discussion between ARB/CIMI/MnM. |
| − | #*Jay Lyle: Not product definitions. | + | #**Andy B: Is a collection of logical models a new product family? It is work to create a collection, not a single model. This may be a product family. In effect the CIMI logical models are part of an independent product line. |
| − | #*Andy B: Instance of a models | + | #**Jay Lyle: Not product definitions. |
| − | #*Jay Lyle: Collection of models. | + | #**Andy B: Instance of a models |
| − | #*Andy B: Hard to not call it a product family - covers a range of product lines - vertical domain of use in healthcare. Look across pathology ordering the dam is a product in a product line, but V2, V3, FHIR are product families. CIMI represents a family of logical models. | + | #**Jay Lyle: Collection of models. |
| − | #*Jay Lyle: Bits of a DAM coordinates into a single model not decomposed is it not a family? | + | #**Andy B: Hard to not call it a product family - covers a range of product lines - vertical domain of use in healthcare. Look across pathology ordering the dam is a product in a product line, but V2, V3, FHIR are product families. CIMI represents a family of logical models. |
| − | #*Andy B: Not a single model, but a SET that covers various dams. | + | #**Jay Lyle: Bits of a DAM coordinates into a single model not decomposed is it not a family? |
| − | #*Harold: Single or set is open to interpretation. If based on the same model there are branches, so is it one or many? | + | #**Andy B: Not a single model, but a SET that covers various dams. |
| − | #*Andy B: Same with FHIR - Individual resources, or a collection. | + | #**Harold: Single or set is open to interpretation. If based on the same model there are branches, so is it one or many? |
| − | #*Harold: Different Granularity. | + | #**Andy B: Same with FHIR - Individual resources, or a collection. |
| − | #*Jay Lyle: CDA is a product family, implied from implementation guides. | + | #**Harold: Different Granularity. |
| − | #*Andy B: CDA product is definition of an IG as a product, CDA is a collection of prod based on a product definition. A single CIMI model is a new product - another kind of logical model, but this is a disservice - it is not really another kind of logical model. New product family with the expectation that there would be multiple instances under the family. | + | #**Jay Lyle: CDA is a product family, implied from implementation guides. |
| − | #*Jay Lyle: My charge is to develop a new Instance. | + | #**Andy B: CDA product is definition of an IG as a product, CDA is a collection of prod based on a product definition. A single CIMI model is a new product - another kind of logical model, but this is a disservice - it is not really another kind of logical model. New product family with the expectation that there would be multiple instances under the family. |
| − | #*Tony: Further questions? | + | #**Jay Lyle: My charge is to develop a new Instance. |
| − | #*Lorraine: | + | #**Tony: Further questions? |
| − | #**If not a new product, we are done. | + | #**Lorraine: |
| − | #**How interested is ARB in following the work - how it fits with the rest of the artifacts. | + | #***If not a new product, we are done. |
| − | #*Harold: Trying to figure out how it fits - part of our goal. | + | #***How interested is ARB in following the work - how it fits with the rest of the artifacts. |
| − | #*Jay Lyle: Should we check investigative? | + | #**Harold: Trying to figure out how it fits - part of our goal. |
| − | #*Lorraine: That does not trigger our review. | + | #**Jay Lyle: Should we check investigative? |
| − | #*Andy S: We should follow what the project does. I think it is a new product, if not a new product family. Merging something from the outside we need to evaluate how it fits in and what it does. This project should not answer the question. | + | #**Lorraine: That does not trigger our review. |
| − | #*'''Motion''' ARB be co-sponsor of the project, with periodic reports on progress what they are doing and where they are going. To develop a better understanding how the CIMI artifacts integrate with the current products and families. (Lorraine/Paul) | + | #**Andy S: We should follow what the project does. I think it is a new product, if not a new product family. Merging something from the outside we need to evaluate how it fits in and what it does. This project should not answer the question. |
| − | #*Andy B: Need to look at how we integrate new work groups - need to discuss with TSC, PLA, and PIC. | + | #**'''Motion''' ARB be co-sponsor of the project, with periodic reports on progress what they are doing and where they are going. To develop a better understanding how the CIMI artifacts integrate with the current products and families. (Lorraine/Paul) |
| − | #*'''Vote''' (4-0-0) | + | #**Andy B: Need to look at how we integrate new work groups - need to discuss with TSC, PLA, and PIC. |
| − | #*Jay Lyle: How periodic should the updates be? | + | #**'''Vote''' (4-0-0) |
| − | #*Lorraine: At the major points in the project. | + | #**Jay Lyle: How periodic should the updates be? |
| + | #**Lorraine: At the major points in the project. | ||
| + | #Other business and planning | ||
| + | #* Tony will forward to TSC with recommendation from ARB for approval. | ||
| + | #*Next Week: ISM | ||
#Adjournment | #Adjournment | ||
#* Adjourned at 16:40, 7 June 2016 (EDT) | #* Adjourned at 16:40, 7 June 2016 (EDT) | ||
| − | + | ([[User talk:Ajulian|talk]]) 16:48, 7 June 2016 (EDT) | |
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | [[Category:2016 Arb Minutes]] | ||
Latest revision as of 20:04, 14 June 2016
ARB - Meeting (Date in Title)
logistics
Teleconferences are held on Tuesday at 4:00pm U.S. Eastern Schedules may be found at HL7.org Conference Call Center
Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone.
- Join the meeting:
- Join the online meeting: Online Meeting Link:https://join.freeconferencecall.com/arb97
- Online Meeting ID:arb97
- If you cant use voip then capture the PIN from the screen for the above action, then
- Dial into the conference: Dial-in Number:(605) 472-5556 - United States
- enter the access code 332183
- enter the pin.
- International Dial-in Numbers:https://www.freeconferencecall.com/wall/arb97/#international
- Weekly conference call.
- For 24/7 customer service please call (844) 844-1322.
Agenda
- Call to order
- Roll Call
- Approval of Agenda and May 31, 2016 Minutes
- Governance
- Methodology (60 minutes)
- CIMI Proof of concept
- Is this a new product? Family? Where does it fit?
- CIMI Proof of concept
- Other business and planning
- Adjournment
Meeting Information
| HL7 ArB Work Group Meeting Minutes Location: Telcon |
Date: 20160531 Time: 4:00pm U.S. Eastern | |||
| Facilitator | Julian, Tony | Note taker(s) | Julian, Tony | |
| Attendee | Name | Affiliation | ||
| X | Bond,Andy | NEHTA | ||
| X | Constable, Lorraine | Constable Consulting Inc. | ||
| R | Dagnall, Bo | HP Enterprise Services | ||
| . | Hufnagel, Steve | ????? | ||
| . | Hyland, Mario | AEGIS | ||
| X | Julian, Tony | Mayo Clinic | ||
| . | Knapp, Paul | Pknapp Consulting | ||
| X | Kubick, Wayne | HL7 CTO | ||
| X | Loyd, Patrick | ICode Solutions | ||
| . | Lynch, Cecil | Accenture | ||
| R | Milosevic, Zoran | Deontik Pty Ltd | ||
| X | Stechishin,Andy | CANA Software and Service Ltd. | ||
| Guests | ||||
| X | Solbrig, Harold | Mayo Clinic | ||
| X | Lyle, Jay | Ockham Information Services LLC | ||
| X | Fisher, Karl | Dell Services | ||
| . | ||||
| Legend | ||||
| X | Present | |||
| . | Absent | |||
| R | Regrets | |||
| Quorum Requirements (Co-chair + 3) Met: Yes | ||||
Minutes
- Agenda approval
- Agenda approved by concensus
- Minute Approval
- Motion to approve (Andy/Andy B)
- Vote 4-0-3
- Methodology (60 minutes)
- CIMI Proof of concept
- Jay Lyle: Not a product - product models and other discoveries.
- Lorraine: It is not clear if it is a mapping artifact, new models - what are the actual artifacts.
- Jay Lyle: New artifacts
- Wayne: Checkbox for logical models
- Lorraine: Not the same as the traditional HL7 Logical models
- Jay Lyle: Not sure what Logical Models means:
- Wayne: Lots of models.
- Harold: General sense they are logical models. Rest of products have formal meaning and definition.
- Tony: New product?
- Harold: Not new to us - new from the HL7 Perspective
- Jay Lyle: New product, but not new product definition. An artifact that defines what a CIMI definition is.
- Andy S: CQL is a new product.
- Lorraine: Subject to ARB review. So we don't proliferate what we have already done.
- Lorraine: The product is not new to CIMI, but to HL7.
- Jay Lyle: Good question.
- Andy S: That is what we are all struggling with.
- Jay Lyle: If there is not an old project model then it is a new one. Doing it now but not as a project.
- Lorraine: This project is part of doing that definition. Granularity level of existing models is not the same as the level of the CIMI models.
- Jay Lyle: Just seeing what fits together.
- Lorraine: If we said it was a new product what actions does that decision drive?
- Jay Lyle: I don't have scope or authority to define CIMI within the scope of the project. Should have a discussion between ARB/CIMI/MnM.
- Andy B: Is a collection of logical models a new product family? It is work to create a collection, not a single model. This may be a product family. In effect the CIMI logical models are part of an independent product line.
- Jay Lyle: Not product definitions.
- Andy B: Instance of a models
- Jay Lyle: Collection of models.
- Andy B: Hard to not call it a product family - covers a range of product lines - vertical domain of use in healthcare. Look across pathology ordering the dam is a product in a product line, but V2, V3, FHIR are product families. CIMI represents a family of logical models.
- Jay Lyle: Bits of a DAM coordinates into a single model not decomposed is it not a family?
- Andy B: Not a single model, but a SET that covers various dams.
- Harold: Single or set is open to interpretation. If based on the same model there are branches, so is it one or many?
- Andy B: Same with FHIR - Individual resources, or a collection.
- Harold: Different Granularity.
- Jay Lyle: CDA is a product family, implied from implementation guides.
- Andy B: CDA product is definition of an IG as a product, CDA is a collection of prod based on a product definition. A single CIMI model is a new product - another kind of logical model, but this is a disservice - it is not really another kind of logical model. New product family with the expectation that there would be multiple instances under the family.
- Jay Lyle: My charge is to develop a new Instance.
- Tony: Further questions?
- Lorraine:
- If not a new product, we are done.
- How interested is ARB in following the work - how it fits with the rest of the artifacts.
- Harold: Trying to figure out how it fits - part of our goal.
- Jay Lyle: Should we check investigative?
- Lorraine: That does not trigger our review.
- Andy S: We should follow what the project does. I think it is a new product, if not a new product family. Merging something from the outside we need to evaluate how it fits in and what it does. This project should not answer the question.
- Motion ARB be co-sponsor of the project, with periodic reports on progress what they are doing and where they are going. To develop a better understanding how the CIMI artifacts integrate with the current products and families. (Lorraine/Paul)
- Andy B: Need to look at how we integrate new work groups - need to discuss with TSC, PLA, and PIC.
- Vote (4-0-0)
- Jay Lyle: How periodic should the updates be?
- Lorraine: At the major points in the project.
- CIMI Proof of concept
- Other business and planning
- Tony will forward to TSC with recommendation from ARB for approval.
- Next Week: ISM
- Adjournment
- Adjourned at 16:40, 7 June 2016 (EDT)
(talk) 16:48, 7 June 2016 (EDT)
