This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "2016-05-12 FMG FGB WGM"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Agenda) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| width="0%" colspan="1" align="left" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Date: 2016-05-12'''<br/> '''Time: 12:30 PM U.S. Eastern''' | | width="0%" colspan="1" align="left" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Date: 2016-05-12'''<br/> '''Time: 12:30 PM U.S. Eastern''' | ||
|- | |- | ||
| + | | width="0%" colspan="2" align="right"|'''Chair''': Lloyd | ||
| width="0%" colspan="1" align="right"|'''Note taker(s)''': Anne | | width="0%" colspan="1" align="right"|'''Note taker(s)''': Anne | ||
|} | |} | ||
| Line 13: | Line 14: | ||
|colspan="2"|FGB Co-Chair/CTO ||colspan="6"|Members | |colspan="2"|FGB Co-Chair/CTO ||colspan="6"|Members | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | |Regrets ||George (Woody) Beeler|| ||Lorraine Constable|| ||Grahame Grieve|| || David Hay | + | |Regrets ||George (Woody) Beeler||x ||Lorraine Constable||x ||Grahame Grieve||x || David Hay |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | ||Dave Shaver || || Ewout Kramer|| ||Lloyd McKenzie (FMG) || ||Calvin Beebe | + | | ||Dave Shaver ||x || Ewout Kramer|| x||Lloyd McKenzie (FMG) || ||Calvin Beebe |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | ||Wayne Kubick || || || || || || | + | |x ||Wayne Kubick || || || || || || |
|- | |- | ||
| − | |FMG Co chairs|| ||David Hay || ||Lloyd McKenzie | + | |FMG Co chairs||x ||David Hay ||x ||Lloyd McKenzie |
|- | |- | ||
| colspan="2"| Members ||colspan="2"|Members||colspan="2"|Members ||colspan="2"|Observers/Guests | | colspan="2"| Members ||colspan="2"|Members||colspan="2"|Members ||colspan="2"|Observers/Guests | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | | || Hans Buitendijk|| ||Brian Postlethwaite || ||Paul Knapp || || | + | |x || Hans Buitendijk||x ||Brian Postlethwaite ||x ||Paul Knapp || || |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | ||Josh Mandel || ||John Moehrke|| ||Brian Pech || || | + | | x||Josh Mandel || ||John Moehrke||x ||Brian Pech || || |
|- | |- | ||
|colspan="2" rowspan="3"|observers/guests | |colspan="2" rowspan="3"|observers/guests | ||
| − | | || | + | |x ||Kevin Shackleford|| x||May Kay McDaniel|| x||Michael (Furore)|| |
| + | |- | ||
| + | |x ||Mark Kramer|| x||Mark Shaferman||| || || | ||
|- | |- | ||
||| | ||| | ||
| Line 44: | Line 47: | ||
**Zulip for topics beyond FHIR | **Zulip for topics beyond FHIR | ||
**Custom Resources | **Custom Resources | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
===Minutes/Conclusions Reached=== | ===Minutes/Conclusions Reached=== | ||
| + | *Agenda review: | ||
| + | **Add FMM4 discussion | ||
| + | ***Group reviews maturity levels. FMM4 – change consensus to consultation and spell out plus instead of using the plus sign | ||
| + | ****MOTION to make the changes by Lloyd; second by Hans | ||
| + | ****VOTE: all in favor (10/0/0) | ||
| + | *Discussion Topics: | ||
| + | **WG Readiness for STU 3: | ||
| + | ***Ewout summarizes that those groups who have had Connectathon experience with their resources can reach level 3. Those who haven’t are struggling. PHER is struggling with immunization items. Pharmacy thinks they can get all of their items to FMM3 or at least 2. Review of top 20 resources and their levels. Discussion over potential movement outside of balloting. Will we get to draft or 1 on workflow? Lloyd thinks we’ll be at 1 for Protocol and 2 for Task. Grahame: On Request vs. Order – should we impose a single word at the FMG level? Lloyd: the recommendation coming out of Workflow is to use Request for all of them, unless there are specific domain reasons that it would be inappropriate. That recommendation will be going out to those who have resources that don’t follow that pattern. Hans: another suggestion was to use Authorization; some say Order is to strong and Request is too weak. Grahame: Contract and Consent – discussed with implementers and they state the existing structure is unsatisfactory. Considering alternative approach with a draft in STU3. In Baltimore should meet with Security and CBCC to talk about next steps, including dealing with ballot comments. Lloyd will send out the spreadsheet for liaisons to fill out all of the resources. Ewout reports Devices is stuck on the Connectathon requirement. Trying to get a traick going. Discussion over having a bundle track with several foundational resources to get testing on them. Hans asks who talked to CDS about their resources? Grahame received a report. DeviceUseRequest is listed as being owned by CDS; should probably be in Pharmacy/Patient Care/O&O instead. | ||
| + | ****ACTION: Add communicating to the community around resources where we’re waiting for implementation topic to FMG | ||
| + | **Ewout: People are worried about changing tools during STU3 timeframe. Lloyd: there is no certainty that we are doing that, it’s simply a possibility. Much anxiety. WGs also asked about changing warnings into errors, which has not yet happened. Ewout suggests the FMG give an update around that. Needs to happen before September. The vast majority are things that aren’t going to kill the build. | ||
| + | **Zulip for topics beyond FHIR | ||
| + | **Custom Resources | ||
| + | *Review Items | ||
| + | **[http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/trackeritem/10013/14243/HL7%20Project%20Scope%20Statement_Tools_Evaluation_v2%201.docx Tools Evaluation PSS] | ||
| + | **[http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/trackeritem/9986/14241/HL7PSS-FHIR%20TechSupport2016-Repository%20Process%20V7%20May11.docx FHIR Repository PSS] | ||
| + | ***Grahame introduces the PSS. No clear process to use the tools, resources, and policies that the FHIR standard offer to produce US realm adopted IGs. The project says we should all collaborate with stakeholders and HL7 participants to describe how everything works together to produce a clear process that everyone understands. Many other countries already has processes in place. US Realm has a pressing need that others don’t. It’s an international project with phase 1 focusing on the US. Hans suggests that should be clearer in the scope statement. Sponsor is FGB. EST should also be there as well as Templates. Brett Marquard will be replaced by Bob DIeterle as one of two project facilitators. Grahame will continue to work on facilitators. Grahame would like to see an ONC facilitator. Mark Kramer expresses tentative interest. Brian Pech will be added as domain expert rep. | ||
| + | ***ACTION: Anne to check which PSS template was used | ||
| + | ***MOTION by Lloyd that FMG agrees to cosponsor as modified. Second by Paul. | ||
| + | ***VOTE: All in favor (6/0/0) | ||
| + | ***MOTION by Lloyd that FGB agree to sponsor. Grahame seconds. | ||
| + | ***VOTE: All in favor (4/0/0) | ||
| − | + | **[http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/trackeritem/10014/14244/HL7%20Project%20Scope%20Statement_DAF_2016_PSS.docx DAF Phase 3 PSS] and [http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/trackeritem/10015/14245/DAF%20FHIR%20Resource%20Proposal.docx DAF FHIR Resource Proposal] | |
| + | *Grahame will post a roadmap for STU3 on his blog. Will distribute for comment via email. | ||
| + | *FGB will not meet on Monday. FMG will meet on Wednesday. | ||
| + | *FGB will go back to Monday Q0 next meeting. | ||
| + | *Adjourned at 5:02 PM Eastern | ||
===Next Steps=== | ===Next Steps=== | ||
Latest revision as of 21:01, 17 May 2016
| HL7 TSC FGB/FMG Meeting Minutes Location: Salon 1 |
Date: 2016-05-12 Time: 12:30 PM U.S. Eastern | |
| Chair: Lloyd | Note taker(s): Anne | |
| Quorum | yes | |||||||
| FGB Co-Chair/CTO | Members | |||||||
| Regrets | George (Woody) Beeler | x | Lorraine Constable | x | Grahame Grieve | x | David Hay | |
| Dave Shaver | x | Ewout Kramer | x | Lloyd McKenzie (FMG) | Calvin Beebe | |||
| x | Wayne Kubick | |||||||
| FMG Co chairs | x | David Hay | x | Lloyd McKenzie | ||||
| Members | Members | Members | Observers/Guests | |||||
| x | Hans Buitendijk | x | Brian Postlethwaite | x | Paul Knapp | |||
| x | Josh Mandel | John Moehrke | x | Brian Pech | ||||
| observers/guests | x | Kevin Shackleford | x | May Kay McDaniel | x | Michael (Furore) | ||
| x | Mark Kramer | x | Mark Shaferman | |||||
Agenda
- Roll Call
- Review Items
- Discussion Topics:
- WG Readiness for STU 3
- Zulip for topics beyond FHIR
- Custom Resources
Minutes/Conclusions Reached
- Agenda review:
- Add FMM4 discussion
- Group reviews maturity levels. FMM4 – change consensus to consultation and spell out plus instead of using the plus sign
- MOTION to make the changes by Lloyd; second by Hans
- VOTE: all in favor (10/0/0)
- Group reviews maturity levels. FMM4 – change consensus to consultation and spell out plus instead of using the plus sign
- Add FMM4 discussion
- Discussion Topics:
- WG Readiness for STU 3:
- Ewout summarizes that those groups who have had Connectathon experience with their resources can reach level 3. Those who haven’t are struggling. PHER is struggling with immunization items. Pharmacy thinks they can get all of their items to FMM3 or at least 2. Review of top 20 resources and their levels. Discussion over potential movement outside of balloting. Will we get to draft or 1 on workflow? Lloyd thinks we’ll be at 1 for Protocol and 2 for Task. Grahame: On Request vs. Order – should we impose a single word at the FMG level? Lloyd: the recommendation coming out of Workflow is to use Request for all of them, unless there are specific domain reasons that it would be inappropriate. That recommendation will be going out to those who have resources that don’t follow that pattern. Hans: another suggestion was to use Authorization; some say Order is to strong and Request is too weak. Grahame: Contract and Consent – discussed with implementers and they state the existing structure is unsatisfactory. Considering alternative approach with a draft in STU3. In Baltimore should meet with Security and CBCC to talk about next steps, including dealing with ballot comments. Lloyd will send out the spreadsheet for liaisons to fill out all of the resources. Ewout reports Devices is stuck on the Connectathon requirement. Trying to get a traick going. Discussion over having a bundle track with several foundational resources to get testing on them. Hans asks who talked to CDS about their resources? Grahame received a report. DeviceUseRequest is listed as being owned by CDS; should probably be in Pharmacy/Patient Care/O&O instead.
- ACTION: Add communicating to the community around resources where we’re waiting for implementation topic to FMG
- Ewout summarizes that those groups who have had Connectathon experience with their resources can reach level 3. Those who haven’t are struggling. PHER is struggling with immunization items. Pharmacy thinks they can get all of their items to FMM3 or at least 2. Review of top 20 resources and their levels. Discussion over potential movement outside of balloting. Will we get to draft or 1 on workflow? Lloyd thinks we’ll be at 1 for Protocol and 2 for Task. Grahame: On Request vs. Order – should we impose a single word at the FMG level? Lloyd: the recommendation coming out of Workflow is to use Request for all of them, unless there are specific domain reasons that it would be inappropriate. That recommendation will be going out to those who have resources that don’t follow that pattern. Hans: another suggestion was to use Authorization; some say Order is to strong and Request is too weak. Grahame: Contract and Consent – discussed with implementers and they state the existing structure is unsatisfactory. Considering alternative approach with a draft in STU3. In Baltimore should meet with Security and CBCC to talk about next steps, including dealing with ballot comments. Lloyd will send out the spreadsheet for liaisons to fill out all of the resources. Ewout reports Devices is stuck on the Connectathon requirement. Trying to get a traick going. Discussion over having a bundle track with several foundational resources to get testing on them. Hans asks who talked to CDS about their resources? Grahame received a report. DeviceUseRequest is listed as being owned by CDS; should probably be in Pharmacy/Patient Care/O&O instead.
- Ewout: People are worried about changing tools during STU3 timeframe. Lloyd: there is no certainty that we are doing that, it’s simply a possibility. Much anxiety. WGs also asked about changing warnings into errors, which has not yet happened. Ewout suggests the FMG give an update around that. Needs to happen before September. The vast majority are things that aren’t going to kill the build.
- Zulip for topics beyond FHIR
- Custom Resources
- WG Readiness for STU 3:
- Review Items
- Tools Evaluation PSS
- FHIR Repository PSS
- Grahame introduces the PSS. No clear process to use the tools, resources, and policies that the FHIR standard offer to produce US realm adopted IGs. The project says we should all collaborate with stakeholders and HL7 participants to describe how everything works together to produce a clear process that everyone understands. Many other countries already has processes in place. US Realm has a pressing need that others don’t. It’s an international project with phase 1 focusing on the US. Hans suggests that should be clearer in the scope statement. Sponsor is FGB. EST should also be there as well as Templates. Brett Marquard will be replaced by Bob DIeterle as one of two project facilitators. Grahame will continue to work on facilitators. Grahame would like to see an ONC facilitator. Mark Kramer expresses tentative interest. Brian Pech will be added as domain expert rep.
- ACTION: Anne to check which PSS template was used
- MOTION by Lloyd that FMG agrees to cosponsor as modified. Second by Paul.
- VOTE: All in favor (6/0/0)
- MOTION by Lloyd that FGB agree to sponsor. Grahame seconds.
- VOTE: All in favor (4/0/0)
- Grahame will post a roadmap for STU3 on his blog. Will distribute for comment via email.
- FGB will not meet on Monday. FMG will meet on Wednesday.
- FGB will go back to Monday Q0 next meeting.
- Adjourned at 5:02 PM Eastern
Next Steps
| Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date) | |||
| Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items
|
Back to FHIR_Management_Group
© 2016 Health Level Seven® International
