20090111 arb orlando minutes

Architecture and Review Board Meeting Minutes

January 11, 2009

Back to Agenda-minutes

Attendees

Name	Present	With	Affiliation	E-main address
Curry, Jane	Yes	ArB	Health Information Strategies	janecurry@healthinfostrategies.com
Grieve, Grahame	Yes	ArB	Kestral Computing	grahame@kestral.com.au
Julian, Tony	Yes	ArB	Mayo Clinic	ajulian@mayo.edu
Koisch, John	Yes	ArB	NCI	koisch_john@bah.com
Lynch, Cecil	Yes	ArB	ontoreason LLC	clynch@ontoreason.com
Mead, Charlie	Yes	ArB	Booz Allen Hamilton	charlie.mead@booz.com
Orvis, Nancy	?	ArB	DOD	nancy.orvis@tma.osd.mil
Parker, Ron	?	ArB	CA Infoway	rparker@eastlink.ca
Quinn, John	?	ArB	Health Level Seven, Inc.	jquinn@HL7.org
Shakir, Abdul-Malik	?	ArB	Shakir Consulting	ShakirConsulting@cs.com
Yongjian, Bao	?	ArB	GE Healthcare	yongjian.bao@med.ge.com
Bear, Yogi	?	Guest	US Dept. Interior, Park Service	yogi@jellystonepark.gov

Call to order

The meeting was called to order at 8:10am by chair John Koish with Tony Julian as scribe.

Agenda approval

MMS to approve the agenda below Grahame/Cecil Vote:(5-0-0)

1. Call to order
2. Approval of Agenda for quarter
3. Approval of Minutes of previous meetings
   1. December 18,2008
4. Approval of Agenda for WGM
5. Review of TSC decisions
6. Internal Governance for HL7
   1. specifically how ArB is expected to interact with other groups (like Harmonization)
   2. other groups (OMG) per AMS's work on MOUs
   3. Should we pursue inviting RIMBAA to ArB session on Thursday, or informal intersections through the week
   4. Should the ArB provide mentoring for groups? Who are the SOA Mentors?
   5. Question of where the SOA work should land, based on the temperate response from the SOA list and the oter co-chairs
7. Review of the Services Items for HL7 SOA WG, SAEAF Impacts
8. Adjournment

Approval of minutes

MMS Cecil/Jane to approve the Minutes of the December 18, 2008 meeting. (5-0-0)

Review of TSC decisions

1. Internal Governance for HL7

• The presentation was taken more literally than was expected - as a top-down organization instead of a conceptual view of the workings of the organization. Charlie McCay suggested that we re-visit the project scope statement - added to agenda for Sunday Q2.
• Slide with potential Recommendations was not well received - due to misunderstanding -specially the line about moving TSSD to ArB.

1. specifically how ArB is expected to interact with other groups (like Harmonization)

Cecil had specific recommendations: Decisions of the ArB cross multiple domains within HL7 as well as many WorkGroups within HL7, and have major impacts on everything. Part of the thinking, is that for any of this to work, all of it has to work. Without us having some concrete implementation, ArB needs to be informed of decisions at Harmonization - to the extent that if it moves to dynamic we need to have some communication.

• CM We need to have a representative at Harmonization. The dialog will have to go two ways so that we can impact harmonization.
• JC The voting structure works that VOCAB and MnM had stronger votes than other committees. Maybe ArB needs to have a voting seat, and possible a veto.
• CM If ArB is to do what John Quinn wants, ArB must have a vote. E.G. SOmebody is proposing to do something that has an impact beyond the scope, ArB needs to do something.
• KJ RIMBAA intended Hl7 RIM models to do things beyond messages. I would think it would impact the model.
• MW The ArB will be effective if it works by laying out principles and general statements, working through WG's and TSC. If someone wants to add an artifact we are not well worked out how to handle.
• JK We started looking at impact of the dynamic model on the MIF.
• GG We would go to harmonization as a WG to discuss. If we are on track, and making sense, we dont need an authoritative vote.
• CL There are things at harmonization that we need to understand, being at the table thinking about the needs of ArB - attendance is enough. There may be instances that come up over time that need decision.
• MW Are there any ArB members that regularly attend Harmonization?
• JC I used to.
• CL I often do.
• JK MW is our 'official' representative.
• JK we need funding to make sure that one of the co-chairs attend.
• JK Are there any other groups we need to inject ourselves into?
• JC There is group work during Harmonization beyond the Harmoization itself. We need concentrated analysis by veterans of their committees. Introduction of SAEAF topics during harmonization are needed. We can opportunistically take advantage of the Harmonization to provide information.

1. other groups (OMG) per AMS's work on MOUs

• AMS is not here, so we will punt.
• CL We need to discuss with RIMBAA.

1. Should we pursue inviting RIMBAA to ArB session on Thursday, or informal intersections through the week

• JK There is a tooling convocation Tuesday Q6 - two different meetings at the same time.
• CL The inauguaral meeting was demonstrations of what people were doing. What I saw was that they have to plan beyond the persistance in the database. It allows us to review what real-world inplementations are being done?
• CM Arent they messaging instead of services.
• CL Some are doing services.
• JK Their web site shows that they have scope beyond messages.
• CL THe work of GELLO has an impact on RIMBAA.
• JK Are you (cecil) going to be there?
• CL Yes
• Micheal I heard about database - you need to do services as well as messages and documents -all three.
• CM Given that the biggest delta is in the Behavioral Framework, RIMBAA is having to create behaviors. If they are doing this in the context of V3 messages, we are on paths that are not totally aligned?
• JK I spent a lot of time going through the materials: They are working on content models instead of messaging - using the engineering viewpoint of ArB.
• JK The other upshots of ArB - Invite RIMBAA to thursday Q3 to discuss. We can have focused discussion this week. Cecil and I will offer to help.
• Micheal We need SAEAF to do this well.

1. Should the ArB provide mentoring for groups? Who are the SOA Mentors?

1. Question of where the SOA work should land, based on the temperate response from the SOA list and the oter co-chairs

Adjournment

• Other business, and planning for next meeting
• Adjournment

Approval of minutes

MMS to approve the minutes of the <meeting> as posted to <posting site> by <name/name> Vote:(0-0-0)

Agenda Item 1

example of bullet list(s)

• level 1
  • level 2
    • level 3
  • level 2
• level 1

Agenda Item 2

Example of numbered list

1. Numbered level 1
   1. Numbered level 2
      1. Numbered level 3
      2. Numbered level 3
   2. Numbered level 2
2. Level 1

Agenda Item 3

Example of grey-boxed note:  The line begins with a space!

Wiki how-to's

Link examples

Remove the <pre> and </pre> from the examples to instantiate as clickable links

wiki link with alternate name

[[Agenda_Minutes|Back to Agenda-minutes]]

Back to Agenda-minutes

Wiki image file with alternate name

[[image:wikiimage.jpg|Template]]

document - must have uploaded it prior to accessing!

[[application/msword:Ex_word_document.doc|word document]]

word document

Note to readers: Permitted file types: png, gif, jpg, jpeg, gif, zip, pdf, jpg, txt, doc.

Fully qualified URL

http://www.hl7.org

http://www.hl7.org

• or

[[http://www.hl7.org|HL7 Web site]]

[HL7 Web site]

Tables

Tables for HTML programmers

Col1	Col 2	Col 3	Col n
Col1	Col 2	Col 3	Col n

Tables for non-html

Quarter	Type	Topic	Chair	Scribe	Not available	MinutesRcvd
MON Q1	--	Plenary Session	--	--	--	N/A

Categories

use

{{InM Open Action Items}}

to create a category

18:14, 29 August 2008 (UTC)