20150408 FMG concall

HL7 TSC FMG Meeting Minutes Location: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/279790597 (voice and screen)		Date: 2015--04-08 Time: 4:00 PM U.S. Eastern
Chair:		Note taker(s): Anne W.

Quorum = chair + 4			yes/no
Co chairs		David Hay	x	Lloyd McKenzie
ex-officio		Woody Beeler, Dave Shaver FGB Co-chairs	.	John Quinn, CTO

Members		Members		Members		Observers/Guests
x	Hans Buitendijk		Brian Postlethwaite	x	Paul Knapp	x	Anne W., scribe
x	Josh Mandel		John Moehrke	x	Brian Pech
						x	Austin Kreisler

Agenda

• Roll Call
• Agenda Check
• Minutes from 20150401_FMG_concall
• Administrative
  • Action items
    • Paul to add Financial track information to Connectathon page
  • Discussion
    • Resources owned by two WGs
• Reports
  • Connectathon management (David/Brian)
  • FGB –
  • MnM –
  • FMG Liaisons –
• Process management
  • Ballot Planning
  • Ballot content review and QA process FHIR QA Guidelines
• AOB (Any Other Business)

Minutes

• Additions to agenda:
  • proposal to replace skype for implementer’s chat
  • resource proposals
  • when and how the continuous build is frozen
• Austin present to discuss FHIR ballot pilot. Lloyd and Austin go over the remaining tasks and distribute.

MOTION: Paul moves to approve agenda, second by Josh. VOTE: Objections, 0 Abstained: 0 In favor: all

• Minutes from last week. MOTION to approve by Hans, second by Paul. VOTE: Objections, 0 Abstained: 0 In favor: all
• Paul will add Financial track this week.
• Connectathon: numbers are creeping up. David reports that he reached out to Devices and they’re not ready for May but are looking forward to it in September. ACTION: David will reach out to Grahame to notify him of this development.
• Resource proposals: Hans asks that, why the ballot is going on, what would we be doing with these proposals? Are they on DSTU 3 track? Lloyd responds that everything here is already out for ballot, but some could be dropped to draft before publication.
  • ProcedureRequest: no questions or concerns. MOTION to approve by Hans. Second by Josh. VOTE: Objections, 0 Abstained: 0 In favor: all
  • Prognosis is now RiskAssessment and has been moved to Patient Care. Josh wonders how it interacts with some of the other proposals, such as ClinicalImpression. Lloyd states that they are not currently connected. MOTION to accept by Hans, second by Josh. VOTE: Objections, 0 Abstained: 0 In favor: all
  • Supply: Challenge is it combines ordering and delivery into one structure. Lloyd feels it should be two separate resources – combining makes him very uncomfortable. Hans agrees. Paul suggests we communicate back to WGs to discover what they need from a resource like this. Hans feels the issues are 1) what is the boundary of supply and 2) splitting supply and dispense. MOTION by Hans to ask device, pharmacy and OO to have a conversation regarding the boundaries between medication, device and supply; Brian Pech seconds. VOTE: Objections, 0 Abstained: 0 In favor: all. MOTION by David that FMG is not comfortable approving supply as a resource that combines both the ordering and fulfilling aspect without further explanation of why it’s necessary. Paul seconds. VOTE: Objections, 0 Abstained: Hans
• ACTION: Anne to add WGs with too many resources to next agenda
• Discussion over FHIR Core WG name: Lloyd feels the word core is important to reflect there is some FHIR stuff that happens here but not a majority.
• Continuous build freeze: Grahame doesn’t want substantive changes to trunk between now and Paris that would impact Connectathon. Ballot site and Connectathon site are the same currently. Paul questions the change schedule as it doesn’t give the opportunity to move things forward. Grahame arrives on the call to discuss. The Connectathon will be run off of the continuous integration build. Should we allow changes on the continuous integration build or create a Connectathon publication site for the Connectathon? Paul thinks there should be the ability to make changes that need to be made. Grahame: if we allow divergence between the ballot and the Connectathon and the Connectathon and the integration build, how do we manage that for people who have adopted the ballot? Gives people a solid target to aim at. The Connectathon needs stability, which the ballot version provides. Paul: okay, so if we do that, why can’t we apply changes to the CIB? Is it because the CIB is backing the ballot version? Grahame notes the difficulty in maintaining forks, for one. Discussion over various potential options. Paul wonders if we can take a stance that we’ll freeze this time because we don’t have the bandwidth to deal with it now, but we’ll consider not freezing in the future? Grahame says we can create a Connectathon branch now, but rather than making a carte blanche to the committees to make changes, we’ll have a consultation process regarding the change during the fork period for things that change schema. Grahame will write up final agreement and send to Lloyd for posting.
• Adjourned at 5:50 pm.

Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)

Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items 20150415 FMG concall

Back to FHIR_Management_Group

© 2015 Health Level Seven® International