ITS WGM Minutes 2011 Jan
Contents
ITS - Sydney Australia, WGM January 2011
Co-Chairs
Paul Knapp (PK) Dale Nelson (DN) Andy Stechishin (AS)
Monday, January 10
Q1
Chair: PK Scribe: AS
Discussion of planned activities for the week
Brief discussion of Green CDA and its relationship to ITS WG
Discussion on hData preparations for ArB session.
Agenda updates posted to Wiki and a message sent to the list server
Q2
Chair: PK Scribe: AS
The group produced the following table of specifications:
| Project | Status | Notes | |
|---|---|---|---|
| DT | Abstract (MnM) | ||
| 1.0 | Norm (2002ish) | ||
| 1.1 | Info (2009/10) | -> Norm (?) | |
| 2.0 (ISO) | Norm (2008/09) | ||
| XML ITS | 1.0 | Norm (2002ish) | |
| 1.1 | Norm (2008) | extensions like SPL | |
| 2.0 | Norm (2010) | {ITS 1.1 + DT 2.0} is it 1.2? | |
| Rim ITS | 1.0 | Norm (2010) | |
| V2 ITS | VBar | Norm (80/90) | |
| XML | Norm (2002) | ||
| UML ITS | 1.0 | Norm (?) (2005) | |
| hData | Record Fmt 1.0 | Comment (2011Jan) | -> DSTU 2011May -> Norm |
| Restful API | Comment (2011Jan) | -> DSTU 2011May -> Norm | |
| Transports | |||
| MLLP | Norm (2005ish) | ||
| Web Services | 1.0 | DSTU (depr 2004) | |
| 2.0 | DSTU (2006 not published) | ||
| 3.0 | Norm (stalled) | review in May | |
| ebXML | 1.0 | DSTU (2006ish) | ballot Norm 2011May |
| 2.0 | Norm (2008 not published) | ||
| ISO9446 | 1 ballot (committee) | Park | |
| Uncategorized | |||
| Neutral Mapping | |||
| Simple ITS | |||
| Green CDA | |||
| Micro ITS | |||
| JSON ITS | |||
The groups decided to create an hData specific PSS letting the ArB determine which WG should own.
At the May, 2011 WGM, ITS will announce that it is looking to deprecate UML ITS and ISO9446 at the September 2011 WGM. Allowing users of the specification plenty of time to raise objections.
Q3
Chair: PK Scribe: AS
hData Record Data Format ballot reconciliation
- Results recorded in the ballot spreadsheet.
It was generally agreed that adding an RMIM and presenting the document in tradition HL7 v3 format would allow reviewers to better evaluate the content.
Q4
Chair: PK Scribe: AS
hData Record Data Format ballot reconciliation completed details recorded in the ballot reconciliation spreadsheet. Ballot reconciliation of the hData RESTful API started. The RESTful API document will not complete reconciliation at the WGM as commenter have requested to be present when their comments are resolved. these commenters were unable to attend the meeting.
Tuesday, January 11
Q1
Chair: PK Scribe: AS
Quick review of standard set within ITS (see Monday Q2)
It was agreed on the need to schedule necessary re-ballots in the next cycle.
Simple ITS, Green CDA, micro ITS - indirect conformance
The micro ITS needs to be scheduled for discussion on status at May, 2011 WGM
JK identified that the RLUS specification may have relevance to the´. hData record data format
There was a discussion of RIM ITS and its relevance to Services.
Q2
Joint with Structured Docs
Q3
Chair: PK Scribe: AS
Bob Dolin from Structured Doc WG as a guest discussed Green CDA.
Q4
ITS was invited to ArB to discuss where the hData documents fit within the organization, please refer to the ArB minutes
Wednesday, January 12
Q1
Chair: PK Scribe: AS
Robert Worden presented a short update on Neutral mapping project via Webex.
R Worden then spent some time on the UK work on a simple ITS
Q2
Chair: PK Scribe: AS, DN
We (ITS) SPL does not want to adapt changes in DT R2 which would mean a lot of changes. It was agreed they would use R1.1, by trading partner agreement. We have a Norm spec that depends on an Inform spec. It is desired to make it Normative. Grahame objects, and wishes to call it DT 2B.
Is the wires format the same in R2 DT as
At abstract, they are implementing DT R2
Datatypes
| Version | Abstract Basis | Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | 1.0 | Normative | |
| 1.1 | 2.0 | Informative | Normative? 2B? |
| 2.0 | 2.0 | Normative |
XMLITS
| Version | Based on | Status |
|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | DT 1.0 | Normative |
| 1.1 | DT 1.0 | Normative |
| 2.0 | DT 2.0 | Normative |
Tooling
| Version | ITS | DT | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | |||
| 1.1 | 1.1 | 1.1 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 |
Which ballot are we talking about JK: redo it using ISO datatypes in a correct way. GG: But that breaks their non-backwards compatibility chain. DN: Has HL7 guaranteed BW compatibility? GG: V2 yes, V3 semantic only. PK: We need to think about what the organization should be doing. Perhaps a straw vote. 1.1->Normative 0 1.1->2Minus 3
Should Normative docs stand on Informative docs: No.
UUID
Issue is in the schema, not the spec. If we were to change the schemas, this is a tech correction. PK: UUID Abs 1 & 2 said UC. If it says case insentive, then we my just have a case in the later schema is incorrect. JK: It is transform away. Can SPL provide the transform? PK: require everyone to do local fixes. PK: We have been consistently wrong, and we finally got it right. Do we force everyone to clean it up or do we fix in a future version? GG: All say comparisons are case insensitive.
| Version | Abstract | ITS | Schema |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | Upper | Mixed | Mixed |
| 1.1 | Mixed | Mixed | |
| 2.0 | Upper | Upper | Upper (annotate) |
GG: Should be TC that 1.0 and 2.0 Abstract are wrong
Motion: The Abstract Datatypes 1.0 and 2.0 descriptions of UUID being upper case be changed to mixed case. (GB, AS) 8/0/1
Action: That GG amend the Abstract Data types, and all associated artifacts.
Motion: (GG/AS) 9-0-0 (1) Do not want to make DT 1.1 backwards compatibility track normative (2) We will if asked by TSC, but want to know how we will avoid maintaining two streams going forward. (3) If it goes normative we will give it an R2 label,
Q3
Did not meet
Q4
Did not meet
Thursday, January 13
Q1
Did not meet
Q2
Chair: PK Scribe: DN
The 3 year plan was agreed upon.
Q3
Did not meet
Q4
Chair: PK Scribe: AS
AS described at some length the Message Builder Project sponsored by Canada Health Infoway for enabling vendors in the Canada.
GB described JSON and how it came into being. There was discussion on whether an ITS had to be 'verifiable' or if the conformance rules could be applied against converted forms, during run-time, et cetera. The group had some interest and believe there may be a use for a JSON ITS, however, it was agreed that if an ITS should be created it should be explicit where the authors thought the ITS was applicable and where the ITS was not.
Attendees
| Name | Initials | Monday | Tuesday | Wednesday | Thursday | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | |||
| Andy Stechishin | AS | andy.stechishin@gmail.com | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | |||||||||
| Dale Nelson | DN | dale.nelson@squaretrneds.com | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | |||||||
| Paul Knapp | PK | pknapp@pknapp.com | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | ||||||
| Gerald Beuchelt | GB | beuchelt@mitre.org | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | ||||||
| Hoylen Sue | HS | hoylen.sue@nehta.gov.au | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | |||||||||
| Philip Wilford | PW | philip.wilford@nehta.gov.au | × | × | × | × | ||||||||||||
| Azmi Hashim | AH | azmi@viamed.com.my | × | × | ||||||||||||||
| Lloyd McKenzie | LM | lloyd@lmckenzie.com | × | |||||||||||||||
| John Koisch | JK | jkoisch@guidewirearchitecture.com | × | × | ||||||||||||||
| Juha Mykkanen | JM | juha.mykkanen@uef.fi | × | |||||||||||||||
| Bob Dolin | BD | × | ||||||||||||||||
| Stephen Royce | SR | stephen.royce@nehta.gov.au | × | × | × | × | ||||||||||||
| Sarah Gaunt | SG | sarah.gaunt@nehta.gov.au | × | × | ||||||||||||||
| Grahame Grieve | GG | grahame@healthintersections.com.au | × | |||||||||||||||
| Vincent Macauley | VM | vincent@macauleysoftware.com | × | |||||||||||||||
| Gavin Morris | GM | gavinm@kestrel.com.au | × | |||||||||||||||
