This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "20150121 HL7 PLA Meeting"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
| || Paul Knapp | | || Paul Knapp | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | | || Austin Kreisler, | + | |x|| Austin Kreisler, |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | || Anne Wizauer | + | |x|| Anne Wizauer |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | || Mary Kay McDaniel | + | |x|| Mary Kay McDaniel |
|- | |- | ||
| || Brian Pech | | || Brian Pech | ||
| Line 98: | Line 98: | ||
===Minutes=== | ===Minutes=== | ||
| − | Convened | + | *Convened at 3:40. |
| + | *Discussion over the future of steering divisions in a product family world. Question hasn't yet been addressed. Reason for steering divisions is to manage the WGs - without them, the product family structure isn't robust enough to substitute. Many WGs work across product families. Do we have a chart for the WGs and what they own? No, but some WGs list it on the website and/or wiki. We have several different kinds of WGs, the most unique being T3SD. They support the groups that develop the product. How does a taskforce fit in to the WG structure? TSC appoints a task force to deal with a specific issue and come up with a proposed solution. Discussion regarding UDI and how to move that forward into an implementation rule that everyone adheres to. TSC would have to make that decision. If we bring in a use case, does it go to every one of the SD co-chair and ask them to push it out to WGs and have them do the analysis? Austin: One way would be for the TSC to spawn a project to implement UDI across our standards. That project would be a coordination project for the product families. Another way would be that each would just operate on their own. Would force reballoting standards without resources to do the work. May not be productive to ask some groups to make the change. Mary Kay: how do you confirm or deny adherence? One idea is that ArB could perhaps convene a group to do that review. | ||
| + | *Next steps? No meetings until 2/18/2015. | ||
| − | Adjourned | + | Adjourned at 4:45 pm |
===Meeting Outcomes=== | ===Meeting Outcomes=== | ||
| Line 130: | Line 132: | ||
|width="100%" |'''Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items'''<br/> | |width="100%" |'''Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items'''<br/> | ||
| − | *[[ | + | *[[20150218 PLA call]] |
|} | |} | ||
© 2014 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved | © 2014 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved | ||
Latest revision as of 22:36, 3 February 2015
return to HL7 Product Line Architecture Meeting Minutes and Agendas
Return to HL7 Product Line Architecture Program
| HL7 PLA Call Minutes Location: Pecan |
Date: 2015-01-21 Time: 3:30 PM | ||
| Facilitator | Mary Kay/ Austin | Note taker(s) | Anne |
| Attendee | Name
| ||
| Calvin Beebe | |||
| Woody Beeler | |||
| Lorraine Constable | |||
| Bo Dagnall | |||
| Jean Duteau, | |||
| Rick Haddorff | |||
| Tony Julian | |||
| Paul Knapp | |||
| x | Austin Kreisler, | ||
| x | Anne Wizauer | ||
| x | Mary Kay McDaniel | ||
| Brian Pech | |||
| John Quinn | |||
| John Roberts | |||
| Andy Stechishin | |||
| no quorum definition | |||
Agenda
Agenda review
- Notes of 20140107_PLA_call review
- Presented to TSC on Sunday
- Update on UDI meeting on Tuesday?
- notional division of products into product families and lines, to provide examples for peer review.
- Level of granularity
- Identify which pieces are orphaned, and the political elements to be surfaced.
- Positioning cross-product family artifacts (standards naming)
- BAM-lite feedback and review
- Governance on V2.x (v2.9 substantive changes)
- develop form to request establishing a Product Family
Minutes
- Convened at 3:40.
- Discussion over the future of steering divisions in a product family world. Question hasn't yet been addressed. Reason for steering divisions is to manage the WGs - without them, the product family structure isn't robust enough to substitute. Many WGs work across product families. Do we have a chart for the WGs and what they own? No, but some WGs list it on the website and/or wiki. We have several different kinds of WGs, the most unique being T3SD. They support the groups that develop the product. How does a taskforce fit in to the WG structure? TSC appoints a task force to deal with a specific issue and come up with a proposed solution. Discussion regarding UDI and how to move that forward into an implementation rule that everyone adheres to. TSC would have to make that decision. If we bring in a use case, does it go to every one of the SD co-chair and ask them to push it out to WGs and have them do the analysis? Austin: One way would be for the TSC to spawn a project to implement UDI across our standards. That project would be a coordination project for the product families. Another way would be that each would just operate on their own. Would force reballoting standards without resources to do the work. May not be productive to ask some groups to make the change. Mary Kay: how do you confirm or deny adherence? One idea is that ArB could perhaps convene a group to do that review.
- Next steps? No meetings until 2/18/2015.
Adjourned at 4:45 pm
Meeting Outcomes
| Actions
|
| Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items |
© 2014 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved
