RIM Stewardship and Harmonization Representation

Overview

At the April 6th, 2007 Conference Call it was decided to treat the issues of Stewardship and harmonization Representation as a Hot Topic. It was felt that these two issues should be handled together as a single Hot Topic.

Issue

There are two basic issues with this Hot Topic that need to be resolved. A third issue has been added regarding documentation of the harmonization process

• Stewardship of Classes in the RIM
• Representation and voting at Harmonization Meetings.
• Harmonization process documentation

Stewardship

Some time ago there was a discussion regarding making MnM the Steward committee for the core RIM classes. Nothing was ever done regarding that.

Harmonization Representation

Only Technical Committees are allowed a vote at Harmonization meetings. The current voting structure doesn't necessarily reflect where in TC's and SIG's V3 development work is taking place.

Representation Resolution

Resolved by change in Harmonization rules adopted on Conference call May 25, 2007.

Harmonization Process Documentation

Currently the Harmonization Process is documented as part of MDF99. The MDF is being replaced by the HDF which indicates that the Harmonization is sponsored by the TSC (section 4.4.4). The HDF does not document the actual harmonization process, so with the adoption of the HDF, it looks like the harmonization process is no long documented.

Discussion

Harmonization Representation

The current Harmonization voting structure only allows TC's and the International Representative to vote at Harmonization. Other groups (SIGs, etc.) may be represented at harmonization, but don't directly vote. This voting structure doesn't represent how much V3 development work is underway by certain groups. For instance, Orders and Observations and its related SIGs and Projects have 10 domains with the Universal Domains section of the current ballot. There are a total of 26 domains in the Universal Domains section of the ballot. That means that over a third of the domains in the current ballot represent work that OO and its associated SIGs and projects are working. Even with that level of effort, OO and it's SIGs and projects have single vote at harmonization. On the other hand, TC's that don't do any V3 work, such as EHR, have as much say in the direction of the RIM as TC's which are doing a tremendous amount of work.

A number of us would like to see a more equitable system which allows groups which are actively developing content for V3 to get voting rights at Harmonization. It's not that we are displeased with the voting being done by our parent TC's, we just think we should have a bigger voice in the voting.

Representation Resolution

The issue on representation was resolved by change in Harmonization rules adopted on Conference call May 25, 2007.

The specific minute reads:

• Harmonization Representation
  • Motion: We revise the V3 Harmonization representation rules to assign a Harmonization vote to the designated steward for each HL7 Special Interest Group that has primary responsibility for primary responsibility for one or more domains under normative consideration (DSTU, Committee normative, Membership normative) or who has an active project whose scope includes the development of normative V3 material or informative documents in the current ballot cycle. This does not alter the provision for Technical Committee representation in Harmonization votes. (Dale Nelson / Rick Chestek 5:0:0)
  • SIGs that may be affected by changes to the harmonization voting privileges:
    • Clinical Genomics
    • Imaging Integration
    • ITS
    • Laboratory
    • Patient Safety
    • Pharmacy
    • PHER
    • SOA

Action required

Update and re-publish Harmonization Rules.