MnM Minutes WGM 200705
HL7 Working Group Meeting
Cologne, Germany
April 29 - May 4
Contents
- 1 Sunday Q3 - Topic Review / Hot Topic Triage
- 2 Sunday Q4 - No Meeting
- 3 Monday Q1 - Hot Topics
- 4 Monday Q2 - Joint with SD
- 5 Monday Q3 - Joint with INM
- 6 Monday Q4 - No Meeting
- 7 Tuesday Q1 - No Meeting
- 8 Tuesday Q2 - No Meeting
- 9 Tuesday Q3 - Joint with Conformance
- 10 Tuesday Q4 - No Meeting
- 11 Wednesday Q1 - Joint with Vocab
- 12 Wednesday Q2 - Joint with Vocab
- 13 Wednesday Q3 - Joint with Templates
- 14 Wednesday Q4 - Joint with Project Lifecycle Team
- 15 Thursday Q1 - Joint with HSSP
- 16 Thursday Q2 - Hot Topics
- 17 Thursday Q3 - Hot Topics
- 18 Thursday Q4 - Hot Topics
- 19 Thursday Evening - Facilitators' Roundtable
- 20 Friday Q1 - MnM Wrap-up and Planning
- 21 Friday Q2 - Hot Topics / Fast Track Issues
Sunday Q3 - Topic Review / Hot Topic Triage
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Topic Review / Hot Topic Triage | Lloyd | Craig | Salon 5 - Bergisches Land |
Hot Topic Triage (see MnM Hot Topics)
- Adding Record Target to ControlAct – May be appropriate for Friday
- Communication Process Model – Thursday Q2 (OO will be discussing this Tuesday Q2)
- Constraints on infrastructureRoot attributes - ?
- Context Conduction
- Domain Message Information Model
- Implementation of updateMode - To be closed.
- Model support for by reference
- NullFlavor
- Observation grab bags
- Packaging of Vocabulary with Static Models - Not believed to be an MnM issue.
- Participation
- Query Recursion - See action item below
- RIM Stewardship and Harmonization Representation
- Serialisation Annotations - Waiting for input from the ITS TC
- Serialization - Appears to just be Lore seeking approval - MnM will follow up on with this on a conference call
- TemplateId
- Use of IDENT Role Class
Action | |
Assignee | Woody |
Item | Make a bug report or a tooling requirement from the Query Recursion Hot Topic. |
Scheduling
- Monday Q1
- Context Conduction
- Monday Q2 - Joint with SD
- inconsistencies in application of methodology in CDA-derived specs
- approaches to templates
- model sharing between messages and documents
- Monday Q3 - Joint with INM
- Dynamic assumptions by INM as prep for Wrapppers 2
- Function of CACT
- Dynamic model - trigger event vs interactionId (Mark T)
- Action 2024: Transmission Addressing (time permitting)
- Monday Q4 - cancelled
- Tuesday Q1 - cancelled
- Tuesday Q2 - cancelled
- Tuesday Q4 - cancelled (Vocab MIF session in Vocab TC)
- Wednesday Q3 - Joint with Templates
- Constraint Language strategy
- Conformance constraints in ballot
- Incomplete models
- Entry points
- Other ballot issues
- Wednesday Q4 - Joint with the Project Lifecycle Team
- Application of project structure to harmonization, hot topics, etc.
- Thursday Q3
- Constraints on infrastructureRoot attributes
- Model support for by reference
- Thursday Q4
- Domain Message Information Model
- Observation grab bags
- Friday Q2
- Adding Record Target to ControlAct
Action | |
Assignee | Woody |
Item | Will see if Ken McCaslin is available for the Wednesday Q4 discussion. |
Sunday Q4 - No Meeting
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Tooling update for facilitators | Woody | Craig | Salon 5 - Bergisches Land |
No formal meeting
- Sundry tooling issues were briefly discussed.
- Russ demonstrated the vocabulary harmonization tool he has been working on.
Monday Q1 - Hot Topics
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Hot Topics
|
Lloyd | Craig | Salon 5 - Bergisches Land |
Lloyd gave an overview of the Context Conduction Hot Topic.
Context Conduction does not propagate across Roles. Grahame pointed this out as something that is true, but is not documented anywhere. We discussed the need to create a document that describes how Context Conduction, Negation Indicator, Inversion Indicator, and such work.
Grahame expressed concern that even if we were to document context conduction well, it is so complicated that people will still either not use it, or will misuse it.
The current situation is a result of implementing context conduction in a way that allowed for existing semantics to continue, namely, that if context conduction is not specified, the result is indeterminate and left up to business agreement between the sender and receiver.
There was discussion about whether we need a formal notation or just more explanatory text.
Kathleen expressed the need to have information in one CMET preferentially override the same information provided by another CMET.
Action | |
Assignee(s) | Woody, Mark T., Grahame, Kathleen |
Item | We will define the requirements for context conduction and then update the documentation of context conduction on the wiki to describe the current way this is supposed to work. We will compare the requirements to the current state to determine a course for the future. |
The Context Conduction Hot Topic has been updated with issues raised during this session.
Monday Q2 - Joint with SD
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Joint with Structured Documents
|
Lloyd | Craig | Salon 5 - Bergisches Land |
Bob Dolin expressed the need for more consistent committee content in order to enable the content of documents and messages to be consistent.
General Model Consistency
Bob Dolin expressed that many inconsistencies are likely to be due to lack of communication between committees. He suggested that if committees strived for more consistency with the Clinical Statement pattern we could improve the consistency, especially for constructs that do not naturally belong to one committee.
Keith Boone suggested that at least one member from each committee should be looking at artifacts from other committees. Tooling that check for proper derivations may be helpful, but are not sufficient.
Woody Beeler pointed out that some inconsistencies are due to artifacts created prior to the formation of the Clinical Statement project. In addition just because two things appear to be similar, it does not necessarily follow that they should be identical. Some of the differences may be appropriate.
There was discussion about how CMETs should contribute to consistency. Keith suggested that some content may be most appropriately managed as CMETs owned by some "Infrastructure" domain. He also stated that expanding Clinical Statements to handle everything is probably not the right approach.
The scope of the RIM and the scope of Clinical Statements are different. The RIM is intended to support everything that HL7 needs to do. Clinical Statments are more narrow in focus.
Liora A. suggested that we may need an "Administrative Statement" pattern to handle the things that are out of scope for Clinical Statements.
Bob Dolin stated that in CDA R3 the intent is to synchronize with the most current version of the Clinical Statement pattern.
Woody suggested that if we have a Clinical Statement and an Administrative Statement, we should have a higher level Infrastructure Model too.
Woody suggested that for the CDA to work well, it should be able to reference the most current version of models from other committees, rather than having to copy all of the content. Bob, Keith and Calvin B. had concerns about CDA versioning too frequently.
Tools that can validate model derivation (in particular derivation from something like the Clinical Statement pattern) would be a very useful first step.
Grahame suggested that either the Clinical Statement pattern is incomplete or that there should be one super-pattern.
Summary: Clinical Statements and similar constructs are useful in ensuring consistency. Derivation validation tooling would be very helpful. We need methods for things like Clinical Statements and things such as Administrative Statements to reference each other.
There was apparent consensus that Clinical Statements need exit points.
Motion | |
Motion | MnM and SD believe that the Clinical Statement concept has been productive and should be extended with exit functionality. We need similar patterns such as Administrative Statements. We may also need enhancements to CMETs for handling finer grained items. MnM and SD will forward the request to the T3F to promote the use of a statment/pattern approach find a home for these activities. |
Result | Woody / Bob (30:0:5) |
Templates
There was discussion principally by Lloyd, Grahame, Galen and Keith about whether or not Templates are static models.
Bob Dolin pointed out that the requirement to use the MIF to create templates is problematic because we currently can't express everything that we want to templates for using MIF.
The question was asked "do templates have to be computable?"
Lloyd asserted that templates must be:
- ITS independent
- Enforcable independent of human intervention
- RIM based
There was discussion about Lloyd's claim that templates must be ITS independent. Without a defined formalism, it is problematic to specify ITS independent templtes that do not require human intervention.
Those doing CDA implementation guides are pushing forward with "templates" for what their needs without an official HL7 fromalism.
This discussion will be carried over into the Templates discussion Wednesday Q3.
Monday Q3 - Joint with INM
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Joint with INM (co-chair election)
|
Woody | Dale | Salon 5 - Bergisches Land |
Monday Q4 - No Meeting
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Cancelled |
Tuesday Q1 - No Meeting
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Cancelled |
Tuesday Q2 - No Meeting
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Cancelled |
Tuesday Q3 - Joint with Conformance
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Joint with Conformance
|
Woody | Craig | Salon 5 - Bergisches Land |
Tuesday Q4 - No Meeting
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Cancelled (Vocab MIF session in Vocab TC) | Salon 5 - Bergisches Land |
Wednesday Q1 - Joint with Vocab
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Joint with Vocabulary (x_Domains, Harmonization, Ballot presentation) | Lloyd | Dale | Salon 5 - Bergisches Land |
Wednesday Q2 - Joint with Vocab
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Joint with Vocabulary (x_Domains, Harmonization, Ballot presentation) | Lloyd | Dale | Salon 5 - Bergisches Land |
Wednesday Q3 - Joint with Templates
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Joint with Templates
|
Woody | Dale | Salon 5 - Bergisches Land |
Constraint Language strategy
Conformance constraints in ballot
Incomplete models
Entry Points
Other ballot issues
Wednesday Q4 - Joint with Project Lifecycle Team
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Joint with the Project Lifecycle Team
|
Woody | Dale | Salon 5 - Bergisches Land |
Thursday Q1 - Joint with HSSP
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Joint with HSSP
|
Lloyd | Craig | Salon 5 - Bergisches Land |
Thursday Q2 - Hot Topics
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Hot Topics
|
Woody | Craig | Salon 5 - Bergisches Land |
Communication Process Model (Dynamic Model)
Thursday Q3 - Hot Topics
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Hot Topics
|
Craig | Dale | Salon 5 - Bergisches Land |
Constraints on infrastructureRoot attributes
Model support for by reference
Thursday Q4 - Hot Topics
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Hot Topics
|
Dale | Craig | Salon 5 - Bergisches Land |
Domain Message Information Model
Observation grab bag
Thursday Evening - Facilitators' Roundtable
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Facilitators' Roundtable | Woody | Craig | Saal 1 Maritim |
Friday Q1 - MnM Wrap-up and Planning
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
MnM Wrap-up & planning for next harmonization & workgroup meetings
|
Woody | Craig | Salon 5 - Bergisches Land |
Meeting Highlights
Agenda for Next WGM
Agenda for Harmonization
Conference Call Schedule
Friday Q2 - Hot Topics / Fast Track Issues
Brief Agenda | Chair | Scribe | Room |
Hot topics/Fast Track issues
|
Lloyd | TBD | Salon 5 - Bergisches Land |