20140616 FGB concall

HL7 TSC FGB Meeting Minutes Location: call 770-657-9270 using code 985371# GoToMeeting ID: 136-494-157		Date: 2014-06-16 Time: 8:00 AM U.S. Eastern
Facilitator:		Note taker(s): David

Quorum = Chair plus 2				yes/no
Co-Chair/CTO		Members
	George (Woody) Beeler	regrets	Lorraine Constable		Grahame Grieve		David Hay
	Dave Shaver		Ewout Kramer		Lloyd McKenzie (FMG)		Ron Parker
	John Quinn
observers/guests			Austin Kreisler
		regrets	Lynn Laakso, scribe

Agenda

• Roll call -
• Agenda Review
• Approve minutes of 20140609 FGB concall
• Action Item review:
  • Follow up with Provider candidate Catherine;
  • Finalize review of Fundamental_Principles_of_FHIR and pass to FMG
• Report back from TSC on approval of updated M&C?
• Issues passed down from TSC
  • Governance Issues in re FHIR Registry - particularly:
    • Distinction between registering an item onto an open list vs. Assigning identifiers and registering their assignment
    • Determine whether HL7, in instituting charges for the OID registry, means to include a fee for retrieving registrations from the registry, or only for adding items thereto. And, if the latter wjat is the intended distinction between: "internal" addition requests, "member" addition requests, and "outside" addition requests?
    • Built-in protections against BOT submissions
    • Expectations for "automated curation" surrounding elements that carry identifiers in HL7-managed namespaces, particularly uri: http://hl7.org/fhir ... and OIDs: 2.16.840.1.113883...

• Updates to FHIR_Governance_Precepts
• FMG update -
• Methodology update-
• Next steps: Define and Resource other Governance processes.
  1. Conformity Assessment

Minutes

Attendees

• Woody Beeler (WB)
• Lloyd McKenzie (LM)
• David Hay (DH)
• Dave Shearer (DS)
• Ewout Kramer (EK)

Convened by Woody Beeler at 4:07

• Agenda Review
  • Fundamentals of FHIR
  • Governance around FHIR registry
  • Review precepts
  • Lloyd move – dave second pass 3/0/0

• Approve minutes of 20140609 FGB concall LM move, DS second pass 3/0/0

• WB report from TSC:
  • A project had CDA changes had not approached Structured Docs (SD). A reminder that any groups involved with anothers groups work should be a co-sponsor
  • Overview by tony Julian on GOM review project. Governance at product line level – need to be governance at multiple levels.
    • EK – a philosophical question. Agree that can’t make too generic.
    • LM – some generic principles – will vary by context. Do need multiple bodies. Will be overlap. Benefit by co-ordination & communication.
    • WB – focus on specific, but look out for common one
  • TSC report on updated mission & charter
    • TSC accepted review
    • Nothing further required
  • Reviewing fundamental Principles of FHIR
    • Hadn’t finished review last week
    • FHIR Leverages web technologies
      • WB try to avoid using social media
      • Don’t like ‘Internet’
        • EW – Internet is wider than web (eg FTP).
        • LM – FHIR is tied to web. Will it still be FHIR if not?. Don’t like tying to ‘newness’ (won’t be new in 10 years). Need to focus on current tech – which is web.
        • EK – agree inspired by the way the web works. Will accept term web.
        • Can use other protocols (eg MLLP) but would lose some benefits of HTTP.
      • Some editing of wording
        • Solutions -> services
        • Remove facebook as example
    • FHIR is forward & backward compatible
      • LM - Hard but necessary (reason why v3/CDA are struggling)
      • WB – noble but what are the long term implications.
        • LM: possible (DICOM have been doing). Does have some constraints – e.g. need to create a new resource.
        • EK: change is inevitable.
        • LM: new release roughly bi-annual. Rare to update resources. Common for new resources, new capabilities (e.g. FHIR in SOAP)
        • WB – what happens when DSTU resources start to circulate in Normative space.
          • LM – they were warned! Do need to have a path forward...
          • EK – splintering already happening (Germany, Lithuania)
          • LM – spec is clear on conformance. Can’t stop people ‘rolling their own’ – but not FHIR conformant.
        • WB – is a governance issue. Maybe not address here. HL7 Organization needs a very clear statement on this issue.
        • EK: we understand that you have functional software that you don’t want to change (unlike google changing API at will)
        • Added comment that using v2 as goal
        • LM: difference between interoperability & compatibility?? – eg v2 tooling can understand any version of v2
    • Move that complete: move EK second LM - pass 3/0/0
    • Send to FMG
  • Meeting adjourn 5:04

Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date) Send Fundamental Principles of FHIR to FMG

Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items 20140623 FGB concall

Back to FHIR_Governance_Board

© 2014 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.