This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
<meta name="googlebot" content="noindex">

Difference between revisions of "2016-10-19 Working Meeting"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "[ Back to main PASS Audit Services page.] = Agenda = * Review minutes from 2016-09-07 Working Meeting | Sep...")
Line 2: Line 2:
= Agenda =
= Agenda =
* Review minutes from [[2016-09-07 Working Meeting | September 7]] meeting
* Review minutes from [[2016-09-07 Working Meeting | September 7]] meeting
* Action items:
* Discuss updates
** Diana to send use case section to Chris Shawn. '''Done'''
* Discuss where to put FM.
** Chris to write the Retrieve Audit Records use case. '''Chris is unable to take on this task. Need someone else to take this on.'''
** Diana to make changes to document according to resolutions. '''In progress'''
* Discuss Mark Underwood's comments on temporal dependencies. (email sent out 9/14/2016)
** Is this in scope for this document?
*** If yes, where/how is it to be included? Business requirements?
* Audit Disclosure scenarios
** Do we include these scenarios in the document?
*** Mike suggests that we categorize the scenarios based on purpose of use.
= Minutes =
= Minutes =

Revision as of 20:09, 19 October 2016

Back to main PASS Audit Services page.


  • Review minutes from September 7 meeting
  • Discuss updates
  • Discuss where to put FM.



Member Present Member Present
Diana Proud-Madruga- SOA co-chair x Andrea Christenot
David Silver x Dave Pyke x
Ken Salyards Doug Timpe
Suzanne Gonzales-Webb Beth Pumo
Mike Davis Mark Underwood
Richard Ettema Mario Hyland
Kevan Riley Chris Shawn

Meeting summary

Action Item:

  • Diana to submit NIB (Due Oct 30)
  • 1st draft due Nov 7 (Diana to send first draft to Lynn)
  • Voting starts Dec 9
  • Task list:
    • Diana finish updates
    • New use case written
    • Insert Audit FM requirements
      • Dave S. to send most recent version to Diana
    • Include temporal considerations? (initial evaluation of Mark's email, this seems to be outside of the scope of this project. Possibility to indicate audit of initial state of system as an option but general consensus is that this is not appropriate or persuasive for this project. Will not include this in this project.)
    • Include Mark Underwood's disclosure scenarios? Dave Pyke to read through scenarios to determine applicability.