2018-06-27 SGB Conference Call

back to Standards Governance Board main page

HL7 SGB Minutes Location: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/538465637		Date: 2018-06-27 Time: 10:00 AM Eastern
Facilitator	Paul/Lorraine	Note taker(s)	Anne

Attendee	Name
x	Calvin Beebe
x	Lorraine Constable
	Russ Hamm
x	Tony Julian
x	Paul Knapp
	Ewout Kramer
x	Austin Kreisler
x	Wayne Kubick
x	Thom Kuhn
	Ken McCaslin
x	Rik Smithies
x	Sandy Stuart
Quorum: Chair + 4

Agenda

• Agenda review
• Approve Minutes of 2018-06-20_SGB_Conference_Call
• Action Items
  • Paul to contact Vocab/PA re: approval items balloting at STU in FHIR R3
    • Will then verify with Karen that the documentation on the FHIR R3 ballot STU approvals is sufficient
  • Paul to ask PH for clarification on the status of items taken out of tracker and then reconciled on spreadsheet/ask for a plan for addressing the issue
• Discussion Topics
  • Review HL7 newsletter submission Hufnagel article for inaccuracies
  • Degree of documentation for STU vs. Normative resources
  • Review FHIR artifact governance process
  • SGB Communication Plan
  • Large architectures coming in
  • CIMI MG followup
  • Precepts We Need to Develop
• Parking Lot
  • Mapping coordination
  • Continued discussion: Tasks in step 1 of the BAM – add to 2018-06-27 agenda
  • Normative balloting/continuous balloting in FHIR – add to 2018-06-27 agenda
    • Add link to Confluence page from ARB page
  • Review of project management life cycle spec to see if it talks about project and ballot scope
  • Review of MG responses to SGB query on substantive change
  • Need to make sure that SGB is accurately reflected in the GOM, and figure out what precepts should appear in the GOM
  • Review Mission and Charter
  • Drafting Shared Product Management Responsibilities
  • Technical Alignments Between Product Families
  • How groups are to interact with publishing, EST, Vocabulary, etc.
  • Precept on bringing in large projects
  • Vocabulary - review HTA material for precepts
  • Precept for adding new tools (include that WGs with a specific mandate must be involved, such as EST, Publishing, Vocabulary, etc.) - was this covered by the tooling precept we created in New Orleans?
  • BAM guidance on process for product adoption
  • Create PRECEPTS that require that it be articulated in the standards how the value sets specified within the standards respond to changes in regulation, licensing, time, etc.- to do in April/before Cologne
  • FHIR Product Director Position Description: we should 1) review further and draft feedback, then 2) map back the description to the role of FGB
  • Ownership of content
  • What precepts do we need to address PSS/profile approval processes of balloting and publishing potentially thousands of CIMI model?

Minutes

• Agenda review
  • No additions
• Approve Minutes of 2018-06-20_SGB_Conference_Call
  • MOTION to approve: Austin/Calvin
  • VOTE: Thom abstains. Remaining in favor.
• Action Items
  • Paul to contact Vocab/PA re: approval items balloting at STU in FHIR R3
    • Will then verify with Karen that the documentation on the FHIR R3 ballot STU approvals is sufficient
      • Carry forward
  • Paul to ask PH for clarification on the status of items taken out of tracker and then reconciled on spreadsheet/ask for a plan for addressing the issue
    • Carry forward
• Discussion Topics
  • Review HL7 newsletter submission Hufnagel article for inaccuracies
    • Reviewed document with Lorraine’s comments/markups. Title makes it look like HL7 policy. TSC recommended that this not be published this cycle while this group works through whether we move forward with the whole concept. Wayne: A disclaimer should be included in articles such as this. Lorraine: Normally no one other than Andrea or a sponsoring WG reviews articles. Wayne suggests he could review articles submitted to Andrea before they’re published to have another set of eyes on them and check technical accuracy. Austin is going to contact Steve and Andrea.
    • Reviewed RDAM investigative PSS that TSC has approved to move forward. Thom doesn’t believe that CIC has approved it. Discussion over why CIC is the lead. Reviewed technical RDAM PSS. What other information do we need to assess this and make the decision? One is what is the current approval state of the project that was approved to go through the review processes? Paul notes that an adjusted document with scope narrowed down to immunization is supposed to come back to steering division on 7/10. A concern was duplicating other work that is being done. How do we approach the international community to get their input? Could look to International reps on TSC, or pull together some International reps on management or methodology groups to review. Thom reviewed minutes and found that CIC voted not to sponsor on 2018-02-22.
      • ACTION: Check where the technical PSS is in the review process
      • ACTION: Get current versions of both PSSes to review
  • Degree of documentation for STU vs. Normative resources
    • Came out of modeling facilitator discussion in Cologne. Some resources weren’t adequately documented in the eyes of FMG. Wayne reached out to Grahame regarding details but hasn’t heard back yet.
  • Review FHIR artifact governance process
    • Reviewed documentation on process. Paul notes that there should be similar processes across families, and we should review process against our PSS process. Discussion over what precept might be needed. Tony states we need a precept and an ISM. Wayne notes that we need more coordination between the proposal and the PSS. Which approach encourages consistency across a domain?
      • ACTION: Paul to draft precept on artifact governance
  • SGB Communication Plan
  • Large architectures coming in
  • CIMI MG followup
  • Precepts We Need to Develop

Meeting Outcomes

Actions

Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items 2018-07-11 SGB Conference Call

© 2018 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved