MnM Minutes WGM 201809 Baltimore
Jump to navigation Jump to search
- 1 MnM 2018 Sep Baltimore WGM Minutes
- 1.1 Agenda
- 1.2 Mon Q4 - Joint w/ FHIR-I - Workflow
- 1.3 Wed Q1 Joint w/ Vocab & FHIR-I
- 1.4 Wed Q2 Joint w/ Vocab
- 1.5 Wed Q3 FHIR Methodology & Data Types issues - Joint w/FHIR-I
- 1.6 Thu Q5 - Roundtable
MnM 2018 Sep Baltimore WGM Minutes
- see 
Mon Q4 - Joint w/ FHIR-I - Workflow
Wed Q1 Joint w/ Vocab & FHIR-I
- See 
Wed Q2 Joint w/ Vocab
- See 
Wed Q3 FHIR Methodology & Data Types issues - Joint w/FHIR-I
- Lloyd McKenzie (chair)
- Ron Shapiro (scribe)
- Grahame Grieve
- Michel Rutten
- Bertil Reppen
- David Hay
- Tim McNeil
- Sean McIlvenna
- Bret Marquard
- Oliver Egger
- Marc Duteau
- Rick Geimer
- Dave Shaver
- IGs, Packages, Versions (multi-version IGs)
- Tracker Items
IGs, Packages, Versions (multi-version IGs)
- Implementation Guides need to be able to coordinate from version to version - eg. create a single Implementation Guide for ballot that includes both R3 and R4 components to avoid getting ballot comments separately on two IGs
- propose to change ImplementationGuide.fhirVersion 0..1 to 0..*
- propose to rename ImplementationGuide.definition.package to ImplementationGuide.definition.grouping
- propose to add ImplementationGuide.definition.resource.fhirVersion 0..* - then each resource will define which version it is used in relative to the ImplementationGuide.fhirVersion
- Packaging - see Alternate #4 of 'ImplementationGuide packages' section on FHIR_Infrastructure_Minutes_CC_20180917
- 18050 - Allow IGs to support multiple versions - Persuasive with Mod
- 19243 - Rename ImplementationGuide.definition.package to avoid confusion with NPM packages - Persuasive with Mod
- 17659 - Need to remove "(Canada)" from JHN - Persuasive
- 17912 - rendering-stylesensitive should include alternate content - move to FHIR-I
- 17790 - Quantity search parameters: clarify that the unit system/code is optional - Persuasive
- 18983 - Inter-version rules are problematic - Persuasive with Mod
Thu Q5 - Roundtable
Grahame demonstration of workflows on git for core FHIR using TortoiseGit. Basic process described below.
- Sync with master branch
- Git pull (with fast forward)
- Apply Patch
- Now fully synced with master
- Create new branch and give it a meaningful name (e.g."typo demo")
- Now have your own branch in which to make changes
- Recommend making a new branch for each logical commit
- Make your changes (e.g. fix your typo) in your local branch. It would be a good idea to then run the build locally. If you have made changes to a FHIR core spreadsheet you MUST run a build first since the build process makes changes to the spreadsheet.
- Git commit. Select file(s) for commit and add a commit comment. It is now committed to your local branch. Ideally your comment should include the gForge tracker id.
- Push to server into your branch, not master (e.g. push to typo demo)
- Got to github.com/hl7/pulls
- Prompted to make a pull request on your latest push. This is a request for github to pull your latest changes into the master
- Github will run a build and see if it works. If build failes you can fix locally and repeat (no need to create another pull request).
- If the build succeeds, you can merge the pull request. All committers currently have the right to merge pull requests, but only on a successful build.
- Now the real build starts and if successful it will deploy to build.fhir.org
- Once successful (and you have verified that your change is on build.fhir.org) you can delete your branch on github (e.g. delete branch "typo demo")
Moved on to main facilitator's meeting.
- Began with a discussion about using the Thursday meeting at future work groups from a facilitators meeting to those making active changes to specifications.
- Introductions, and discussions (harmonization proposals, reports, etc.)
- Lloyd: harmonization proposal
- Scott Robertson: nothing
- Paul Knapp: FM will have harmonization proposal for V2
- Eric Hass: nothing
- Brian Peck: moving publication stuff off Grahame's place
- Rick Smithies: nothing
- Sandy Stewart: nothing
- Rob Hausam: nothing
- Riki Merrick: harmonization proposal
- Brian P.: nothing
- Alexander Henket: nothing
- Rick Geimer: nothing (scribe)
- John M.: nothing at the moment, but Kathleen might show up with something. Does have a facilitator topic to discuss. Security work group will be adding a mechanism to the FHIR build where each resource will be categorized into buckets for security classification (i.e. business security, PHI, ok for anonymous access, etc.). Grahame will then review, etc.
- Grahame: FHIR status report
- Ted Kline: nothing notable to report in vocab. Small harmonization proposal for UTG. Also noted some overlap on some V2 tables. Question if we have duplicative content that needs to be addressed, but it has been through 2 cycles.
- AMS: nothing
- Grahame's FHIR status report:
- Balloted 4 normative packages from FHIR. 2 passed (FHIR Infrastructure and Patient) Ballot rec complete. Terminology Conformance and Observation passed ballot, but we decided to make substantive changes which will require an out of cycle ballot. Ballot notice will go out over the weekend. Only people who voted in May or Sept will be allowed to vote. Scope will be limited to the 4 substantive changes. Anyone is free to file tracker items at any time, but should not put them in the ballot if not related. Still expect to publish by year end. For January ballot, cycle is very short. Less than 2 weeks to have IG in place and to do the NIB if you wish to publish this cycle.
- Will start FHIR r5 planning in San Antonio, so committees should start their prep work. Grahame will ask that all resources that have US Core Profiles to go normative in R5 (i.e. the base resources underlying US Core, not the profiles themselves).
- Grahame will also work on a roadmap for FHIR R5.
- Ted asked if material from Harmonization must be ready for the upcoming cycle. Lloyd has a minor display name change he would like in. Grahame will need post harmonization changes by Nov 25.
- Ted: harmonization discussion
- Terminology content of most ballots get a superficial review, result = crap. Harmonization is supposed to help fix this (prep for ballot).
- Oct 26: initial proposals due
- Oct 29: tech review notes released
- Nov 6: final proposals due
- Nov 7: Ted to prepare/deliver final harmonization package
- Nov 8: harmonization meeting. If runs late can extend to Friday Nov 9.
- Nov 16: QA release
- Nov 21: QA comes back
- Nov 25: Final release