This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "MnM Minutes CC 20090619"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | [[Category:2009 MnM Minutes]] | ||
'''Attendees:''' Woody, Lloyd, Andy, Austin, Dale, Patrick, Jean, Gregg, Dave Carlson, Norman Daoust | '''Attendees:''' Woody, Lloyd, Andy, Austin, Dale, Patrick, Jean, Gregg, Dave Carlson, Norman Daoust | ||
| Line 12: | Line 13: | ||
#***"Does the tool need to support profiles of what is displayed?" | #***"Does the tool need to support profiles of what is displayed?" | ||
#'''Resolution from Today's Call:''' | #'''Resolution from Today's Call:''' | ||
| − | #*With the exception of the elements listed as " | + | #*With the exception of the elements listed as "remaining issues" below, the committee unanimously agreed (Lloyd moved, Andy seconded) that it had reached consensus on the the following: |
#*# M&M agrees that the BNF as presented should be the "foundation" for representing HL7 meta-data in diagrams. | #*# M&M agrees that the BNF as presented should be the "foundation" for representing HL7 meta-data in diagrams. | ||
#*#: (Recognizing there is still a need to elaborate a syntax for enumerations, and there is a desire to represent this in EBNF.) | #*#: (Recognizing there is still a need to elaborate a syntax for enumerations, and there is a desire to represent this in EBNF.) | ||
Latest revision as of 01:22, 21 May 2010
Attendees: Woody, Lloyd, Andy, Austin, Dale, Patrick, Jean, Gregg, Dave Carlson, Norman Daoust
- Minutes Review with Date change - Andy/Gregg
- MOTION: Allow the RIM Harmonization proposals to be submitted on June 20-21 - Lloyd/Andy
- Graphical Format, i.e Static Model Representation
- There was a discussion of the BNF
- is this in Tooling's domain or MnM's?
- Discussion of different graphical views of a model
- The question became "What do we need to expose in the diagram?"
- Lloyd raised the idea of two questions:
- "What must the tool be capable of displaying?"
- "Does the tool need to support profiles of what is displayed?"
- There was a discussion of the BNF
- Resolution from Today's Call:
- With the exception of the elements listed as "remaining issues" below, the committee unanimously agreed (Lloyd moved, Andy seconded) that it had reached consensus on the the following:
- M&M agrees that the BNF as presented should be the "foundation" for representing HL7 meta-data in diagrams.
- (Recognizing there is still a need to elaborate a syntax for enumerations, and there is a desire to represent this in EBNF.)
- M&M agrees that all tools supporting development and implementation of HL7 static models should be capable of implementing this BNF to represent HL7 meta-data in their diagrams.
- M&M agrees that the BNF as presented should be the "foundation" for representing HL7 meta-data in diagrams.
- There are (at least) two remaining issues:
- How strong should the "Requirement" for wrapping be? (Depends, in part on whether this is an intractable problem for most tools.)
- Whether and and how do we enable "representation profiles" for various levels of meta-data in graphics in order to meet varying forms of model abstraction.
- With the exception of the elements listed as "remaining issues" below, the committee unanimously agreed (Lloyd moved, Andy seconded) that it had reached consensus on the the following:
- Future schedule - agreed to the following changes for near-future Conference Call Topics:
- June 26 - Primary focus on RIM Reconciliation for GROUPER, plus an update on Graphical Formats beyond today's call, and a rescheduling of the Context Conduction discussion
- July 17, add Graphical Formats as a primary topic if there remain open issues.
Meeting adjourned at 1:20PM
