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

Difference between revisions of "MnM Minutes CC 20090619"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(New page: Attendees: Woody, Lloyd, Andy, Austin, Dale, Patrick, Jean, Gregg, Dave Carlson, Norman Daoust 1) Minutes Review with Date change - Andy/Gregg 2) '''MOTION:''' Allow the RIM Harmonization...)
 
 
(4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Attendees: Woody, Lloyd, Andy, Austin, Dale, Patrick, Jean, Gregg, Dave Carlson, Norman Daoust
+
[[Category:2009 MnM Minutes]]
 +
'''Attendees:''' Woody, Lloyd, Andy, Austin, Dale, Patrick, Jean, Gregg, Dave Carlson, Norman Daoust
  
1) Minutes Review with Date change - Andy/Gregg
+
# Minutes Review with Date change - Andy/Gregg
2) '''MOTION:''' Allow the RIM Harmonization proposals to be submitted on June 20-21 - Lloyd/Andy
+
# '''MOTION:''' Allow the RIM Harmonization proposals to be submitted on June 20-21 - Lloyd/Andy
3) Graphical Format, i.e Static Model Representation
+
# Graphical Format, i.e Static Model Representation
-There was a discussion of the BNF
+
#*There was a discussion of the BNF
-is this in Tooling's domain or MnM's?
+
#**is this in Tooling's domain or MnM's?
-Discussion of different graphical views of a model
+
#*Discussion of different graphical views of a model
-The question became "What do we need to expose in the diagram?"
+
#**The question became "What do we need to expose in the diagram?"
-Lloyd raised the idea of two questions:
+
#**Lloyd raised the idea of two questions:
-"What must the tool be capable of displaying?"
+
#***"What must the tool be capable of displaying?"
-"Does the tool need to support profiles of what is displayed?"
+
#***"Does the tool need to support profiles of what is displayed?"
 +
#'''Resolution from Today's Call:'''
 +
#*With the exception of the elements listed as "remaining issues" below, the committee unanimously agreed (Lloyd moved, Andy seconded) that it had reached consensus on the the following:
 +
#*# M&M agrees that the BNF as presented should be the "foundation" for representing HL7 meta-data in diagrams.
 +
#*#: (Recognizing there is still a need to elaborate a syntax for enumerations, and there is a desire to represent this in EBNF.)
 +
#*# M&M agrees that all tools supporting development and implementation of HL7 static models should be capable of implementing this BNF to represent HL7 meta-data in their diagrams.
 +
#* There are (at least) two remaining issues:
 +
#*# How strong should the "Requirement" for wrapping be? (Depends, in part on whether this is an intractable problem for most tools.)
 +
#*#Whether and and how do we enable "representation profiles" for various levels of meta-data in graphics in order to meet varying forms of model abstraction.
 +
#'''Future schedule''' - agreed to the following changes for near-future Conference Call Topics:
 +
#* June 26 - '''Primary''' focus on RIM Reconciliation for GROUPER, plus an update on Graphical Formats beyond today's call, and a rescheduling of the Context Conduction discussion
 +
#* July 17, add Graphical Formats as a '''primary''' topic if there remain open issues.
 +
Meeting adjourned at 1:20PM

Latest revision as of 01:22, 21 May 2010

Attendees: Woody, Lloyd, Andy, Austin, Dale, Patrick, Jean, Gregg, Dave Carlson, Norman Daoust

  1. Minutes Review with Date change - Andy/Gregg
  2. MOTION: Allow the RIM Harmonization proposals to be submitted on June 20-21 - Lloyd/Andy
  3. Graphical Format, i.e Static Model Representation
    • There was a discussion of the BNF
      • is this in Tooling's domain or MnM's?
    • Discussion of different graphical views of a model
      • The question became "What do we need to expose in the diagram?"
      • Lloyd raised the idea of two questions:
        • "What must the tool be capable of displaying?"
        • "Does the tool need to support profiles of what is displayed?"
  4. Resolution from Today's Call:
    • With the exception of the elements listed as "remaining issues" below, the committee unanimously agreed (Lloyd moved, Andy seconded) that it had reached consensus on the the following:
      1. M&M agrees that the BNF as presented should be the "foundation" for representing HL7 meta-data in diagrams.
        (Recognizing there is still a need to elaborate a syntax for enumerations, and there is a desire to represent this in EBNF.)
      2. M&M agrees that all tools supporting development and implementation of HL7 static models should be capable of implementing this BNF to represent HL7 meta-data in their diagrams.
    • There are (at least) two remaining issues:
      1. How strong should the "Requirement" for wrapping be? (Depends, in part on whether this is an intractable problem for most tools.)
      2. Whether and and how do we enable "representation profiles" for various levels of meta-data in graphics in order to meet varying forms of model abstraction.
  5. Future schedule - agreed to the following changes for near-future Conference Call Topics:
    • June 26 - Primary focus on RIM Reconciliation for GROUPER, plus an update on Graphical Formats beyond today's call, and a rescheduling of the Context Conduction discussion
    • July 17, add Graphical Formats as a primary topic if there remain open issues.

Meeting adjourned at 1:20PM