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

Difference between revisions of "MnM Minutes CC 20110302"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 48: Line 48:
 
Will make the change of combining first two paragraphs in this section.
 
Will make the change of combining first two paragraphs in this section.
  
==Reconcile Core Principles Negative Votes==
+
==Reconcile Core Principles A-* Votes for Section 1==
There are 28 such items by current count.
+
===Item 1 [at 1/1.1] (B A-S) 0/0/0===
 +
=====Voter Comment=====
 +
As it stands, it looks like you first constrain for realm, then for clinical practice.  In fact the reverse is usually true.  We shouldn't be implying any type of order.
 +
=====Disposition & Disposition Comment - "Persuasive"=====
 +
Make the change
 +
 
 +
===Item 2 [at 1/1.1] (B A-Q) 0/0/0===
 +
=====Voter Comment=====
 +
Is UML an "essential feature"?  I'm concerned that the wording will be misinterpretted to mean that where we diverge from core features of UML, we will be seen as violating this premise.  As well, it's hard to argue that the vocabulary model is based even vaguely on UML.
 +
=====Disposition & Disposition Comment - "Persuasive with mod"=====
 +
Propose to make it "and that, to the extent possible, these models will be based ..."
 +
 
 +
===Item 3 [at 1/1.1] (B A-S) 0/0/0===
 +
=====Voter Comment=====
 +
=====Disposition & Disposition Comment - "Persuasive"=====
 +
Make the change
 +
 
 +
===Item 4 [at 1/1.1] (B A-S) 0/0/0===
 +
=====Voter Comment=====
 +
When we publish the RIM, we don't refer to releases, we refer to versions.  So it would be useful to include the version as a cross-reference. 
 +
=====Disposition & Disposition Comment - "Persuasive with mod"=====
 +
Release 1 (version 1.25) of the RIM …"
 +
 
 +
===Item 5 [at 1/1.1] (B A-Q) 0/0/0===
 +
=====Voter Comment=====
 +
We're going to ISO regularly with the RIM now, aren't we?  Do we really need to be specific about which versions have gone to he RIM?
 +
=====Disposition & Disposition Comment - "Not persuasive"=====
 +
Not yet - agree once we do.
 +
 
 +
===Item 6 [at 1/1.1] (B A-T) 0/0/0===
 +
=====Voter Comment=====
 +
The spacing between the bullets is different.
 +
=====Disposition & Disposition Comment - "Persuasive"=====
 +
Reomve second <br/> after second bullet
 +
 
 +
===Item 7 [at 1/1.1] (B A-Q) 0/0/0===
 +
=====Voter Comment=====
 +
Technically, only the Datatypes ITS is a CEN and ISO standard.  Abstract Datatypes is not.
 +
=====Disposition & Disposition Comment - "Considered - Question Answered"=====
 +
Yes, but that is a nuance that few would understand.
 +
 
 +
===Item 194 [at 1.1.1 Model Nomenclature Changes/0.0] (B A-S) 0/0/0===
 +
=====Voter Comment=====
 +
Please align RIM terms to reflect CPP usage or delete from CPP until aligned
 +
=====Disposition & Disposition Comment - "Persuasive with mod"=====
 +
Will CONTINUE to do BEST to keep CoreP alogned with RIM.
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
  
 
{{:MnM Action Items from 201005}}
 
{{:MnM Action Items from 201005}}
  
 
==Adjournment==
 
==Adjournment==

Revision as of 18:32, 17 February 2011

M&M Conference Call 4:00PM Eastern Time (Date above)

Logistics

Join GoToMeeting at

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/701832453
Meeting ID: 701-832-453

Return to MnM Minutes

Agenda

Approve Agenda and Minutes Prior Meeting on 02/23

Reconcile Core Principles Negative Votes

Proposed actions in Spread sheet on Ballot Desktop

Filter: Section=4.1 and 3.4.1.1; Vote and type=Neg-Mi; For = 0

Document Being Reconciled

As of 2/23 Conference call, the following negatives remain. Lloyd McKenzie and Grahame Grieve will collaborate to address the first three of these; fourth is proposed here:

Item 33 [at 3/3.4.1.1] (M Neg-Mi) 0/0/0

Voter Comment

I have *no clue* what this is saying.

Disposition & Disposition Comment - "tbd"

Item 34 [at 3/3.4.1.1] (M Neg-Mi) 0/0/0

Voter Comment

Not true. The association end names (traversal names) are determined separately for each class in the choice hierarchy. While some association end names may indeed be constructed using the name of the target class, this has nothing to do with choices.

Disposition & Disposition Comment - "tbd"

Item 35 [at 3/3.4.1.1] (M Neg-Mi) 0/0/0

Voter Comment

One of the defining features of a LIM is that it is never used as an expressed model. If it's used as an expressed model, then it's a SIM. If we're not happy with usage being a characteristic of whether something is a LIM or not, then we should just say that LIMs have incomplete classes and accept that templates might be LIMs or SIMs.

Disposition & Disposition Comment - "tbd"

Item 40 [at 4/4.1] (G Neg-Mi) 0/0/0

Voter Comment

This doesn't make sense. Drop the sentence or change.

Disposition & Disposition Comment - "Not persuasive with mod"

Problem is the second paragraph should become the final sentence of the first paragraph. In that case, this reference (which opens the third paragraph) does make sense because the non-update mode uses of reference are summarized in the first para.

Will make the change of combining first two paragraphs in this section.

Reconcile Core Principles A-* Votes for Section 1

Item 1 [at 1/1.1] (B A-S) 0/0/0

Voter Comment

As it stands, it looks like you first constrain for realm, then for clinical practice. In fact the reverse is usually true. We shouldn't be implying any type of order.

Disposition & Disposition Comment - "Persuasive"

Make the change

Item 2 [at 1/1.1] (B A-Q) 0/0/0

Voter Comment

Is UML an "essential feature"? I'm concerned that the wording will be misinterpretted to mean that where we diverge from core features of UML, we will be seen as violating this premise. As well, it's hard to argue that the vocabulary model is based even vaguely on UML.

Disposition & Disposition Comment - "Persuasive with mod"

Propose to make it "and that, to the extent possible, these models will be based ..."

Item 3 [at 1/1.1] (B A-S) 0/0/0

Voter Comment
Disposition & Disposition Comment - "Persuasive"

Make the change

Item 4 [at 1/1.1] (B A-S) 0/0/0

Voter Comment

When we publish the RIM, we don't refer to releases, we refer to versions. So it would be useful to include the version as a cross-reference.

Disposition & Disposition Comment - "Persuasive with mod"

Release 1 (version 1.25) of the RIM …"

Item 5 [at 1/1.1] (B A-Q) 0/0/0

Voter Comment

We're going to ISO regularly with the RIM now, aren't we? Do we really need to be specific about which versions have gone to he RIM?

Disposition & Disposition Comment - "Not persuasive"

Not yet - agree once we do.

Item 6 [at 1/1.1] (B A-T) 0/0/0

Voter Comment

The spacing between the bullets is different.

Disposition & Disposition Comment - "Persuasive"

Reomve second
after second bullet

Item 7 [at 1/1.1] (B A-Q) 0/0/0

Voter Comment

Technically, only the Datatypes ITS is a CEN and ISO standard. Abstract Datatypes is not.

Disposition & Disposition Comment - "Considered - Question Answered"

Yes, but that is a nuance that few would understand.

Item 194 [at 1.1.1 Model Nomenclature Changes/0.0] (B A-S) 0/0/0

Voter Comment

Please align RIM terms to reflect CPP usage or delete from CPP until aligned

Disposition & Disposition Comment - "Persuasive with mod"

Will CONTINUE to do BEST to keep CoreP alogned with RIM.



Review Action Items For MnM

Note the following list, and amend the list to assign selected items:

Adjournment