MnM Minutes WGM 200705

HL7 Working Group Meeting
Cologne, Germany
April 29 - May 4

Sunday Q3

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Topic Review / Hot Topic Triage	Lloyd	Craig	Salon 5 - Bergisches Land

Hot Topic Triage (see MnM Hot Topics)

• Adding Record Target to ControlAct – May be appropriate for Friday
• Communication Process Model – Thursday Q2 (OO will be discussing this Tuesday Q2)
• Constraints on infrastructureRoot attributes - ?
• Context Conduction
• Domain Message Information Model
• Implementation of updateMode - To be closed.
• Model support for by reference
• NullFlavor
• Observation grab bags
• Packaging of Vocabulary with Static Models - Not believed to be an MnM issue.
• Participation
• Query Recursion - See action item below
• RIM Stewardship and Harmonization Representation
• Serialisation Annotations - Waiting for input from the ITS TC
• Serialization - Appears to just be Lore seeking approval - MnM will follow up on with this on a conference call
• TemplateId
• Use of IDENT Role Class

Action
Assignee	Woody
Item	Make a bug report or a tooling requirement from the Query Recursion Hot Topic.

Scheduling

• Monday Q1
  • Context Conduction
• Monday Q2 - Joint with SD
  • inconsistencies in application of methodology in CDA-derived specs
  • approaches to templates
  • model sharing between messages and documents
• Monday Q3 - Joint with INM
  • Dynamic assumptions by INM as prep for Wrapppers 2
  • Function of CACT
  • Dynamic model - trigger event vs interactionId (Mark T)
  • Action 2024: Transmission Addressing (time permitting)
• Monday Q4 - cancelled
• Tuesday Q1 - cancelled
• Tuesday Q2 - cancelled
• Tuesday Q4 - cancelled (Vocab MIF session in Vocab TC)
• Wednesday Q3 - Joint with Templates
  • Constraint Language strategy
  • Conformance constraints in ballot
  • Incomplete models
  • Entry points
  • Other ballot issues
• Wednesday Q4 - Joint with the Project Lifecycle Team
  • Application of project structure to harmonization, hot topics, etc.
• Thursday Q3
  • Constraints on infrastructureRoot attributes
  • Model support for by reference
• Thursday Q4
  • Domain Message Information Model
  • Observation grab bags
• Friday Q2
  • Adding Record Target to ControlAct

Action
Assignee	Woody
Item	Will see if Ken McCaslin is available for the Wednesday Q4 discussion.

Sunday Q4

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Tooling update for facilitators	Woody	Craig	Salon 5 - Bergisches Land

No formal meeting

• Sundry tooling issues were briefly discussed.
• Russ demonstrated the vocabulary harmonization tool he has been working on.

Monday Q1

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Hot Topics Context Conduction	Lloyd	Craig	Salon 5 - Bergisches Land

See Context Conduction

Lloyd gave an overview of the Context Conduction Hot Topic.

Context Conduction does not propagate across Roles. Grahame pointed this out as something that is true, but is not documented anywhere. We discussed the need to create a document that describes how Context Conduction, Negation Indicator, Inversion Indicator, and such work.

Grahame expressed concern that even if we were to document context conduction well, it is so complicated that people will still either not use it, or will misuse it.

The current situation is a result of implementing context conduction in a way that allowed for existing semantics to continue, namely, that if context conduction is not specified, the result is indeterminate and left up to business agreement between the sender and receiver.

There was discussion about whether we need a formal notation or just more explanatory text.

Kathleen expressed the need to have information in one CMET preferentially override the same information provided by another CMET.

Action
Assignee(s)	Woody, Mark T., Grahame, Kathleen
Item	We will define the requirements for context conduction and then update the documentation of context conduction on the wiki to describe the current way this is supposed to work. We will compare the requirements to the current state to determine a course for the future.

The Context Conduction Hot Topic has been updated with issues raised during this session.

Monday Q2

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Joint with Structured Documents Inconsistencies in application of methodology in CDA-derived specs Approaches to templates Model sharing between messages and documents How can we make sure the information being sent in messages and documents are the same? How can resolve model discrepancies across committees?	Lloyd	Craig	Salon 5 - Bergisches Land

Bob Dolin expressed the need for more consistent committee content in order to enable the content of documents and messages to be consistent.

General Model Consistency

Bob Dolin expressed that many inconsistencies are likely to be due to lack of communication between committees. He suggested that if committees strived for more consistency with the Clinical Statement pattern we could improve the consistency, especially for constructs that do not naturally belong to one committee.

Keith Boone suggested that at least one member from each committee should be looking at artifacts from other committees. Tooling that check for proper derivations may be helpful, but are not sufficient.

Woody Beeler pointed out that some inconsistencies are due to artifacts created prior to the formation of the Clinical Statement project. In addition just because two things appear to be similar, it does not necessarily follow that they should be identical. Some of the differences may be appropriate.

There was discussion about how CMETs should contribute to consistency. Keith suggested that some content may be most appropriately managed as CMETs owned by some "Infrastructure" domain. He also stated that expanding Clinical Statements to handle everything is probably not the right approach.

The scope of the RIM and the scope of Clinical Statements are different. The RIM is intended to support everything that HL7 needs to do. Clinical Statments are more narrow in focus.

Liora A. suggested that we may need an "Administrative Statement" pattern to handle the things that are out of scope for Clinical Statements.

Bob Dolin stated that in CDA R3 the intent is to synchronize with the most current version of the Clinical Statement pattern.

Woody suggested that if we have a Clinical Statement and an Administrative Statement, we should have a higher level Infrastructure Model too.

Woody suggested that for the CDA to work well, it should be able to reference the most current version of models from other committees, rather than having to copy all of the content. Bob, Keith and Calvin B. had concerns about CDA versioning too frequently.

Tools that can validate model derivation (in particular derivation from something like the Clinical Statement pattern) would be a very useful first step.

Grahame suggested that either the Clinical Statement pattern is incomplete or that there should be one super-pattern.

Summary: Clinical Statements and similar constructs are useful in ensuring consistency. Derivation validation tooling would be very helpful. We need methods for things like Clinical Statements and things such as Administrative Statements to reference each other.

There was apparent consensus that Clinical Statements need exit points.

Motion
Motion	MnM and SD believe that the Clinical Statement concept has been productive and should be extended with exit functionality. We need similar patterns such as Administrative Statements. We may also need enhancements to CMETs for handling finer grained items. MnM and SD will forward the request to the T3F to promote the use of a statment/pattern approach find a home for these activities.
Result	Woody / Bob (30:0:5)

Templates

There was discussion principally by Lloyd, Grahame, Galen and Keith about whether or not Templates are static models.

Bob Dolin pointed out that the requirement to use the MIF to create templates is problematic because we currently can't express everything that we want to templates for using MIF.

The question was asked "do templates have to be computable?"

Lloyd asserted that templates must be:

• ITS independent
• Enforcable independent of human intervention
• RIM based

There was discussion about Lloyd's claim that templates must be ITS independent. Without a defined formalism, it is problematic to specify ITS independent templtes that do not require human intervention.

Those doing CDA implementation guides are pushing forward with "templates" for what their needs without an official HL7 fromalism.

This discussion will be carried over into the Templates discussion Wednesday Q3.

Monday Q3

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Joint with INM (co-chair election) Dynamic assumptions made by INM as preparation for Wrappers 2 Function of CACT Dynamic model - trigger event vs interactionID (Mark T) Action 2024: Transmission Addressing (time permitting)	Woody	Dale	Salon 5 - Bergisches Land

Monday Q4

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Cancelled			Salon 5 - Bergisches Land

Tuesday Q1

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Cancelled

Tuesday Q2

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Cancelled			Salon 5 - Bergisches Land

Tuesday Q3

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Joint with Conformance ballot reconciliation?	Woody	Craig	Salon 5 - Bergisches Land

Tuesday Q4

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Cancelled (Vocab MIF session in Vocab TC)			Salon 5 - Bergisches Land

Wednesday Q1

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Joint with Vocabulary (x_Domains, Harmonization, Ballot presentation)	Lloyd	Dale	Salon 5 - Bergisches Land

Wednesday Q2

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Joint with Vocabulary (x_Domains, Harmonization, Ballot presentation)	Lloyd	Dale	Salon 5 - Bergisches Land

Wednesday Q3

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Joint with Templates Constraint Language strategy Conformance constraints in ballot Incomplete models Entry Points Other ballot issues	Woody	Dale	Salon 5 - Bergisches Land

Wednesday Q4

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Joint with the Project Lifecycle Team Application of project structure to harmonization, hot topics, etc.	Woody	Dale	Salon 5 - Bergisches Land

Thursday Q1

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Joint with HSSP including harmonization of models with 'messaging' Ongoing discussion, review HL74SOA issues	Lloyd	Craig	Salon 5 - Bergisches Land

Thursday Q2

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Hot Topics Communication Process Model (Dynamic Model)	Woody	Craig	Salon 5 - Bergisches Land

Thursday Q3

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Hot Topics Constraints on infrastructureRoot attributes Model support for by reference	Craig	Dale	Salon 5 - Bergisches Land

Thursday Q4

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Hot Topics Domain Message Information Model Observation grab bag	Dale	Craig	Salon 5 - Bergisches Land

Thursday Evening - Facilitators' Roundtable

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Facilitators' Roundtable	Woody	Craig	Saal 1 Maritim

Friday Q1

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
MnM Wrap-up & planning for next harmonization & workgroup meetings	Woody	Craig	Salon 5 - Bergisches Land

Friday Q2

Brief Agenda	Chair	Scribe	Room
Hot topics/Fast Track issues Adding Record Target to ControlAct See Adding Record Target to ControlAct, Control Act	Lloyd	TBD	Salon 5 - Bergisches Land