Difference between revisions of "MnM Minutes CC 20120718"
(Created page with "{{subst::MnM Template for Agenda-Minutes}}") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | |||
<!-- | <!-- | ||
EDITORS - When converting the content from Agenda to minutes: | EDITORS - When converting the content from Agenda to minutes: | ||
| Line 6: | Line 5: | ||
2) Delete the Logistics template reference | 2) Delete the Logistics template reference | ||
{{:MnM Conference Call Logistics}} below | {{:MnM Conference Call Logistics}} below | ||
| − | -->[[Category:2012 MnM Minutes | + | -->[[Category:2012 MnM Minutes]] |
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ | ||
=M&M Conference Call 4:00PM Eastern Time (Date above)= | =M&M Conference Call 4:00PM Eastern Time (Date above)= | ||
| − | + | ||
[[:Category:2012 MnM Minutes|Return to MnM Minutes]] | [[:Category:2012 MnM Minutes|Return to MnM Minutes]] | ||
==Agenda== | ==Agenda== | ||
| − | *Approve [[ | + | *Approve [[MnM_Minutes_CC_20120711| Minutes Prior Meeting on 07/11]] |
| + | *Issue with Core Principles Statements on Context Conduction of individual attributes | ||
| + | *Need to Add FHIR Methodology to MnM Mission and Charter | ||
| + | ==Attendees== | ||
| + | Austin Kreisler, Andy Stechishin, Rob Hausam, Woody Beeler | ||
| + | ==Accept Agenda and Approve [[MnM_Minutes_CC_20120711| Minutes Prior Meeting on 07/11]]== | ||
| + | Moved/Seconded AK/AS Unanimous | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Issue with Core Principles Statements on Context Conduction of individual attributes== | ||
| + | Austin Kreisler reported a ''' major mis-match''' between statements in the RIM and Core Principles about the new Context Conduction mechanisms as they apply to the conduction of individual attributes of Act. Both the RIM, and the approved Harmonization Proposal state that this conduction '''can be over-ridden''' by the assertion of a different value (for example for a languageCode change) deeper in the context. The Core Principles statement, however contradicts this. | ||
| + | |||
| + | It is crucial to Structured documents (who requested this) that the ability to over-ride exist. Since the Core Principles is going back out to ballot this month, we agreed to discuss the insertion of a "technical correction" to Core Principles at the MnM Conference Call on July 25. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Need to Add FHIR Methodology to MnM Mission and Charter== | ||
| + | The Technical Steering Committee has asked that MnM amend its Mission and Charter statement to expressly include responsibility for the FHIR Methodology (as agreed at the Vancouver WGM). Today, we opened the extant Mission and Charter and encountered questions that require broader discussion that can include more of the MnM Co-chairs. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The current mission and Charter says: | ||
| − | + | :The Modeling and Methodology Work Group (MnM) is responsible for: | |
| − | + | :*creating and maintaining the HL7 Development Methodology and facilitating its use;, and | |
| + | :*for maintaining a Reference Model and Data Types Model that govern the shared models that are developed and used by the HL7 Work Groups creating designs in model-based standards development; | ||
| + | :*managing and approving modeling patterns and reusable modeling constructs for HL7 designs; and | ||
| + | :*developing and enforcing good modeling practices. | ||
| − | + | At a near-future conference call, MnM '''must consider''': | |
| − | + | #Does the first bullet above include, as it would appear, responsibility for 2.x methodology? | |
| + | # If not, we should amend the statement to exclude this and add FHIR methodology explicitly. | ||
| + | #If so, does this conflict with Structured Documents re CDA?? | ||
| + | #Also, if so, What of Functional Models, CCOW, Arden, Security, DEEDS and others?? | ||
| − | |||
==Adjournment== | ==Adjournment== | ||
| + | At 4:30 PM | ||
Latest revision as of 21:15, 18 July 2012
M&M Conference Call 4:00PM Eastern Time (Date above)
Agenda
- Approve Minutes Prior Meeting on 07/11
- Issue with Core Principles Statements on Context Conduction of individual attributes
- Need to Add FHIR Methodology to MnM Mission and Charter
Attendees
Austin Kreisler, Andy Stechishin, Rob Hausam, Woody Beeler
Accept Agenda and Approve Minutes Prior Meeting on 07/11
Moved/Seconded AK/AS Unanimous
Issue with Core Principles Statements on Context Conduction of individual attributes
Austin Kreisler reported a major mis-match between statements in the RIM and Core Principles about the new Context Conduction mechanisms as they apply to the conduction of individual attributes of Act. Both the RIM, and the approved Harmonization Proposal state that this conduction can be over-ridden by the assertion of a different value (for example for a languageCode change) deeper in the context. The Core Principles statement, however contradicts this.
It is crucial to Structured documents (who requested this) that the ability to over-ride exist. Since the Core Principles is going back out to ballot this month, we agreed to discuss the insertion of a "technical correction" to Core Principles at the MnM Conference Call on July 25.
Need to Add FHIR Methodology to MnM Mission and Charter
The Technical Steering Committee has asked that MnM amend its Mission and Charter statement to expressly include responsibility for the FHIR Methodology (as agreed at the Vancouver WGM). Today, we opened the extant Mission and Charter and encountered questions that require broader discussion that can include more of the MnM Co-chairs.
The current mission and Charter says:
- The Modeling and Methodology Work Group (MnM) is responsible for:
- creating and maintaining the HL7 Development Methodology and facilitating its use;, and
- for maintaining a Reference Model and Data Types Model that govern the shared models that are developed and used by the HL7 Work Groups creating designs in model-based standards development;
- managing and approving modeling patterns and reusable modeling constructs for HL7 designs; and
- developing and enforcing good modeling practices.
At a near-future conference call, MnM must consider:
- Does the first bullet above include, as it would appear, responsibility for 2.x methodology?
- If not, we should amend the statement to exclude this and add FHIR methodology explicitly.
- If so, does this conflict with Structured Documents re CDA??
- Also, if so, What of Functional Models, CCOW, Arden, Security, DEEDS and others??
Adjournment
At 4:30 PM
