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

MnM Minutes WGM 201005 Rio de Janeiro

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Sunday,May 16, 2010 - Q3

Agenda

  • Agenda Topics Review
  • Hot Topics Triage

Minutes

PRESENT: Rene Spronk, Austin Kreisler, Patrick Loyd, Grahame Grieve, Lorraine Constable, Hugh Glover, Jean Duteau, Lloyd McKenzie, Woody Beeler, Gregg Seppala, Rik Smithies

  • Agenda Discussion
  • Hot Topics to discuss
    • Object Identity
    • Safe interpretation of data subset
    • CMET process & Direct Model referencing
    • Template versioning
    • Cumulative Dose and Dose Check Quantity
    • Incomplete Static Models
    • IVL<TS>
    • Context Conduction in non-serialized models
  • ACTION: Grahame will produce a webpage of the most common datatype problems and link to it from the M&M wiki.
  • Context Conduction was decided to be dealt with outside of the WGM.
  • ACTION: Woody will update the WGM schedule and email it to the list.

Sunday, May 16, 2010 - Q4

Agenda

  • Tooling Overview For Facilitators

Monday, May 17, 2010 - Q1

Agenda

  • MIF2 Reconcilliation

Minutes

PRESENT: Lloyd McKenzie (chair), Ravi, Jean Duteau, Michael Steine, Tessa van Stijn, Woody Beeler (for last 15 minutes)

  • Worked through the MIF2 comment spreadsheet.
      1. 17 - MOTION: Ravi/Jean
      2. 19 - MOTION: Ravi/Jean
      3. 20 - MOTION: Ravi/Jean
      4. 34 - MOTION: Ravi/Michael
      5. 36 - MOTION: Ravi/Jean
      6. 37 - MOTION: Ravi/Michael
      7. 39 - MOTION: Ravi/Jean
      8. 41 - MOTION: Jean/Michael
      9. 42 - MOTION: Ravi/Jean
      10. 43 - MOTION: Ravi/Jean
      11. 44 - MOTION: Ravi/Woody
    • Typos - MOTION: Woody/Ravi
    • Affirmatives - MOTION: Ravi/Woody

We will finish the rest of the Affirmatives either in another quarter or in a teleconference call.

Monday, May 17, 2010 - Q2

Agenda

  • Joint with Project Services

Minutes

Monday, May 17, 2010 - Q3

Agenda

  • RIM Reconcilliation

Minutes

Monday, May 17, 2010 - Q4

Agenda

  • Core Principles Reconcilliation

Minutes

Tuesday, May 18, 2010 - Q1

Agenda

  • Core Principles Reconcilliation

Minutes

Tuesday, May 18, 2010 - Q2

Agenda

  • Reconcilliation Overflow

Minutes

Tuesday, May 18, 2010 - Q3

Agenda

  • Hot Topics - "CMET Process & Direct Model Referencing"

Minutes

Tuesday, May 18, 2010 - Q4

Agenda

  • Hot Topics - "Template Versioning" & "Cumulative Dose and Dose Check Quantity"

Minutes

Wednesday, May 19, 2010 - Q1

Agenda

  • Hosting Joint with Vocabulary - MIF Reconcilliation

Minutes

Wednesday, May 19, 2010 - Q2

Agenda

Minutes

Wednesday, May 20, 2010 - Q3

Hot Topics: "Object identity" & "Safe interpretation of subsets of data"

Back to MnM Main Page

Attendees

Grahame Grieve, Woody Beeler, Lloyd Mackenzie, Rene Spronk, Victor Chai, Sarah Gaunt, Gaby Jewell, Ravi Natarajan

Agenda

Object Nets and Object Identity

Discussion concerning Managing Object Identities. Object identity

Outcomes:

  • Without an identifier on an object, it's very difficult to manage the object. So identifiers should never be constrained out
  • even if the static model constrains an association out, it may still be actually in the object model because of context conduction or past exceptions
  • Role.id is a muddle - not clear what the scope of the identifier is. R2 differentiation of business vs object identifier is helpful but does not resolve the problem. Rene will update Object identity to describe R2 on this matter. Recommend pushing adoption of R1.1 as much as possible in this regard
  • Entities - some are identified by code. Propose that Vocab create an property of a code system to say whether a code is also an identifier (Appellation)
  • Participations and ActRelationships - do not have identity. In general there should only be one association between an act and a (act|role) with the same type and effective time

Safe Interpretation of RIM Data

See Safe querying of a RIM-based data model (more RIMBAA focused) and Safe interpretation of subsets of data

  • Lloyd - Short answer: anything that's required in the applicable model.
  • More general answer: in the absence of a conformance context, nothing can be ignored. You can only ignore things because the conformance statement instructed the RIM author that these things must be ignorable
  • It's generally safe to interpret an act in the absence of it's context because of moodCode - except for moodCode Opt (if the mood code is opt, the act is incomplete and the owner must be considered)
  • You always have to consider the intent to decide how the act must be interpreted. Recommend to consider the actRelationships that point at the act - depends on your intent, and consider the type they have as to whether the context they suggest is relevant to your intent
  • It's really hard to interpret any data in the absence of the specification because of the poor quality of our existing models. This is especially apparent in CDA R2 profiles where the choice of Act Relationships is so limited
  • you must consider associations established by context conduction
  • We can't advise on what could be generally ignored. It does depend, but there's nothing that we can say for sure that can be ignored

Back to MnM Main Page

from: MnM Minutes 2010 Rio 19 May Q3

Thursday, May 20, 2010 - Facilitator's Roundtable

Agenda

Minutes