This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
2016-03-02 FMG concall
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| HL7 TSC FMG Meeting Minutes Location: |
Date: 2016-03-02 Time: 4:00 PM U.S. Eastern | |
| Chair: | Note taker(s): Anne W. | |
| Quorum = chair + 4 | yes/no | |||||
| Co chairs | x | David Hay | x | Lloyd McKenzie | ||
| ex-officio | Woody Beeler, Dave Shaver FGB Co-chairs |
. | John Quinn, CTO | |||
| Members | Members | Members | Observers/Guests | ||||
| Hans Buitendijk | x | Brian Postlethwaite | x | Paul Knapp | x | Anne W., scribe | |
| Josh Mandel | x | John Moehrke | x | Brian Pech | Grahame Grieve | ||
| . | |||||||
Agenda
- Roll Call
- Agenda Check
- Minutes from 2016-02-24_FMG_concall
- Administrative
- Action items
- Lloyd to follow up on MnM PSS
- Lloyd to update on AdverseEvent changes/whether or not WG will complete the proposal
- Brian Post to check on SOA PSS
- Brian to finish up ServicesDirectorandScheduling
- David to reach out to track leads to have them complete track reports
- David to reach out to Connectathon proposal submitters to have them add information regarding preparation levels
- David to draft spreadsheet to determine track completeness and gauge attendee interest
- Eric Haas to update DAF to reflect lab results
- Someone to complete Workflow (currently a placeholder)
- Approval Items
- Project Approval Request by the Vocabulary WG of the FTSD of HL7 Vocabulary FHIR Specification Updates at Project Insight 1247 and Tracker 9662
- Review Pending Resource Proposals
- Discussion Topics:
- Review draft report to TSC on ballot experience
- Further issues around custom resources?
- Back Burner
- US Realm for FHIR
- Lloyd to bring back updated QA criteria from MnM for inclusion in FHIR QA guidelines
- 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
- Called to order at 4:05
- MOTION to accept agenda by Lloyd; second by Brian Post
- VOTE: all in favor
- MOTION to accept minutes from last week by Paul; second by Lloyd
- VOTE: all in favor
- Action items
- Lloyd to follow up on MnM PSS - MnM didn't meet this week; move to next week
- ACTION: add to next week
- Lloyd to update on AdverseEvent changes/whether or not WG will complete the proposal
- ACTION: add to next week
- Lloyd to follow up on MnM PSS - MnM didn't meet this week; move to next week
- Brian Post to check on SOA PSS
- ACTION: add followup to next week; still need numbers
- Brian to finish up ServicesDirectorandScheduling
- ACTION: add to next week
- David to reach out to track leads to have them complete track reports - completed.
- ACTION: add followup to next week
- David to reach out to Connectathon proposal submitters to have them add information regarding preparation levels - completed.
- David to draft spreadsheet to determine track completeness and gauge attendee interest. Reviewed spreadsheet. David will create separate area for experimental tracks.
- ACTION: Brian Post to tidy up/combine tracks
- reviewed proposals:
- CDS Enablement Services - Grahame working with Claude
- CDS Hooks - looks good
- Conditional Reference - going into experimental track
- CQF on FHIR - not on spreadsheet. Paul: looks like a significant amount of work. David adds to spreadsheet.
- DAF - good
- Declarative mapping - incomplete. Lloyd thinks this should perhaps move to experimental track - should check with Grahame.
- FHIR Genomics - looks complete.
- Structured Data Capture - good
- Financial Track - good
- PATCH - experimental
- ServicesDirectoryAndScheduling - Brian will clean up and merge with the others
- SMART-ca on FHIR - David adds to spreadsheet
- Workflow - big problems. Major part of upcoming release. Lack of interest in working on it. David offers to work it up for referrals to spur interest and participation. Brian offers to do some herding in Australia as they have a national program working on referrals.
- ACTION: David/Brian to draft ReferralsWorkflow proposal
- Eric Haas to update DAF to reflect lab results -
- ACTION: add followup to next week
- Brian Post to check on SOA PSS
- Project Approval request from Vocab:
- MOTION to approve by Paul; second by Lloyd
- VOTE: all in favor
- Resource Proposals
- Sequence - Lloyd states this is covered by the RIM already. Some think it should be handled by Observation. Perhaps they should go to ballot and get the input.
- MOTION to accept proposal by Paul; second by John.
- VOTE: Lloyd abstains. Remaining in favor.
- ACTION: Liaisons (Paul and David) to prompt CDS and Devices to make sure the proposals are complete and get them reviewed and approved with dates noted on proposal.
- Sequence - Lloyd states this is covered by the RIM already. Some think it should be handled by Observation. Perhaps they should go to ballot and get the input.
- Review draft report to TSC on ballot experience:
- Need TSC approval of this document before we go to ballot again. Paul: question from TSC may be what actions can be taken to mitigate some of the objections? Lloyd: not a lot. A better tool would help but we've done what we can within the gforge environment. Paul: we need a summary paragraph at the top to say here's what we think overall; the items that are addressable have been address and some things will remain behind that can't be addressed; and overall it is net positive and we feel we should continue to use it. Brian Pech asks if alternatives to gforge have been looked at; Lloyd states that would be punted to EST. First step would be soliciting feedback from WGs on pros/cons of gforge, then go out and seek alternatives and those two sets of information can be used to evaluate cost/benefit of doing a replacement and migration.
- ACTION: Add further discussion to next week's agenda
- ACTION: Add custom resources to next week's agenda when Grahame comes back
- Need TSC approval of this document before we go to ballot again. Paul: question from TSC may be what actions can be taken to mitigate some of the objections? Lloyd: not a lot. A better tool would help but we've done what we can within the gforge environment. Paul: we need a summary paragraph at the top to say here's what we think overall; the items that are addressable have been address and some things will remain behind that can't be addressed; and overall it is net positive and we feel we should continue to use it. Brian Pech asks if alternatives to gforge have been looked at; Lloyd states that would be punted to EST. First step would be soliciting feedback from WGs on pros/cons of gforge, then go out and seek alternatives and those two sets of information can be used to evaluate cost/benefit of doing a replacement and migration.
- Adjourned at 5:29 pm
Next Steps
| Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date) | |||
| Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items |
Back to FHIR_Management_Group
© 2015 Health Level Seven® International
