20140915 FGB Mtg at WGM

HL7 FGB Meeting Minutes Location: Room 4L, September WGM - Chicago Date: 2014-09-15 Time: 7:00 AM U.S. Central
Facilitator: Woody		Note taker(s): Woody

Quorum = Chair plus 2				'yes
Co-Chair/CTO		Members
x	Woody Beeler	x	Lorraine Constable	X	Grahame Grieve	X	David Hay (FMG)
Regrets	Dave Shaver	X	Ewout Kramer	x	Lloyd McKenzie (FMG)		Ron Parker
	John Quinn
observers/guests			Martijn Haarthorn

Topics

• How are "components" of FHIR advanced through Ballot
• How should we manage the foreseen "avalanche of expectations" for FHIR
• How can FHIR best take advantage of new participants who are coming to "work" (sleeves rolled up)?

Agenda Review

In the end we dealt with the first and the third of these topics and agreed that the second should be subjects of near-future FGB Conference Calls

Advancing "components" of FHIR through Ballot

This subject was presented by a some-what heated discussion the prior evening in the TSC, and the concerns of many of the Work Groups seeking to meet the forthcoming deadlines for FHIR that they need a way to triage their effort.

As a result of our discussion it was agreed that we need to articulate some of the flexibility on advancing FHIR content that is clearly needed. While FHIR Ballots have seemed to be monolithic, all-or-none events, individual elements of the ballots will be at different stages and others may even be segregated for independent balloting. Specifically:

• Resources within the package may be at different stages of maturity and these differences need to be explained and flagged to include
  • Normative (future)

  • DSTU

  • Draft

• Profiles - While these may have similar stages as resources, they can also be segregated and balloted in packages that are independent of the FHIR Ballots, albeit they remain dependent upon the "current" FHIR specification from which their Resources, etc. are drawn. Clearly there are sets of Profiles that should be balloted as part of the HL7 FHIR Specification. This led to the following classifications for Profiles that will ultimately inform decisions for their balloting:
  • Base - the handful of profiles that define common extensions for FHIR Resources and must be part of the FHIR Specification

  • Core - Profiles deemed by HL7 to be essential to the core business of health care interoperability and are therefore balloted and published as part of the HL7 FHIR Specification. To be part of this core, the Profiles must
    • Must be developed by an HL7 Work Group and approved by FMG for inclusion in the core

    • Have an agreed-upon, coherent set of requirements

    • Cross-realm support

    • Apparent longevity and stability

  • HL7-Published Profiles that HL7 has undertaken a project to produce and Ballot outside of the "Core" specification. These may include:
    • Profiles required by a single realm, such as the SDC profiles

    • Profiles that may not meet the longevity requirements, but for which a sponsoring group can make the case for HL7 balloting

Managing the Impact of and Taking advantage of New FHIR Development resources

As part of the burgeoning attention on FHIR there is a prospect of have new developers work with HL7 to advance the development of FHIR. Discussion of this led to the recognition of a number of issues and/or principles that need further consideration.

• There is a need to scope out "projects" within FHIR development to which these developers might be assigned

• There is a need for additional effort in the "core" area as well as other development

• How can we best engage with the burgeoning FHIR community that is not strongly linked to HL7?

• It is essential to maintain the ethos and culture of HL7 and the core community even as we expand those communities

Meeting adjourned at 8:00 AM