20140305 PLA call
return to HL7 Product Line Architecture Meeting Minutes and Agendas
Return to HL7 Product Line Architecture Program
|HL7 PLA Call Minutes
Location: Phone: +1 770-657-9270, Participant Code: 985371,
|Facilitator||Ken/ Austin||Note taker(s)||Lynn|
|no quorum definition|
- Notes of 20140219_HL7_PLA_Meeting review
- Action Item: Lynn to distribute version with Filter if #s fall into carve-outs only
- Use filtered product grid to map our existing products into notional division of products into product families and lines, to provide examples for peer review.
- Level of granularity
- Identify which pieces are orphaned, and the political elements to be surfaced.
- Positioning cross-product family artifacts (standards naming)
- BAM-lite feedback and review
- Governance on V2.x (v2.9 substantive changes)
- develop form to request establishing a Product Family
Agenda review - facilitation by Ken who invites someone else - Austin cannot lead the effort but can facilitate calls. Roles discussed and Austin's concern about not having a BAM delivered yet. Edge cases should not be addressed (CCOW, Arden) but the primary families. Review of motivations for the effort includes governance over issues like V2 enhancements, V3 datatypes 1.1, there is a benefit even if the BAM gets restructured later.
- Notes of 20140122_HL7_PLA_Meeting review -Austin was there in cardboard cutout form…
- Use draft product grid to map our existing products into notional division of products into product families and lines, to provide examples for peer review.
- Carve out edge cases of Arden Syntax, CCOW, and GELLO, though GELLO has been published as a V3 standard.
- Carve out non-"standards development" items in Education, Help Desk and Meetings and stay in the same scope as the BAM. Conformance as compared to the service of Conformance Testing to be offered by HL7 might need to be sorted out. Education, Help Desk, Meetings might all be sub titles of FHIR/V2/V3/CDA/EHR etc. as primary product families. Analysis artifacts can also apply to the main product families or, if done right, can stand on their own as a SAIF conceptual model apart from the other families
- need to go through and see if there is a number in analysis artifact or conformance that doesn't also have an x in another product to see if it makes sense. Different in multiple indicators for CCD reviewed.
- Cecil's opinion on only two product families reviewed. Content models are represented in the columns but services for example don't need their own product family. V3 column might be better titled V3 Messaging. Do other V3 Document standards that are not CDA constitute a separate family? (e.g. SPL and HQMF are V3 templated documents)
- Filter if #s fall into carve-outs only, but keep if they are tallied in carve-outs plus main families?
- Skip next week for HIMSS
|Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items|
© 2014 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved