This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here

OO CR192-853 - Pre-Adopt ARV Segments in LOI/LRI

From HL7Wiki
Revision as of 23:59, 17 November 2016 by Ployd (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{OO Open V2.10 Change Requests}} Return to OO Change Requests page. {|width=100% cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2 border=1 || '''Submitted by:''...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Return to OO Change Requests page.

Submitted by: Patrick E. Loyd Revision date: <<Revision Date>>
Submitted date: 17-Nov-2016 Change request ID: OO CR-385
Standard/IG: v2.10 Standard Artifact ID, Name: <<Artifact ID, Name>>

Issue

From today's call - re reviewed where things were. Patrick was speaking to the proposal and had not been looped in to the ARV change. We considered an evote for timing but ended up with the following:

We have a motion on the table to approve the CR as presented (from OO point of view) We agreed to post on the wiki and start a wiki based discussion (which could have been the discussion period leading up to an evote.) Since people needed to the 23rd to review, a one week evote would put us to the 30th, so we agreed to take up the question on the Dec 1 call Need to email v2 Publishing with their v2 Management Group hat on to clarify who should contribute/ review. Their next call is 3 ET on the 29th PSS has been approved by TSC with the request for the clarifications changes would have to be made to the IG to pre-adopt the CR, Bob Yencha seemed to think that was do-able.

On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 1:35 PM, Buitendijk,Hans <Hans.Buitendijk@cerner.com> wrote: With further notes that the proposal is switching to ARV rather than CON, which is owned by Chapter 3, which is PA, but always confused how much may be FM.

So we have two clarifications then:

· Ownership of now ARV

· Adjustment of the language to reflect that CG V2 Lite apparently was never official.


The second I had applied, but not the first. Per OO call today, what’s left to be done and how much needs to be done before we go to ballot, or is just considered an administrative clarification?

Thank you!

Recommendation

Rationale

Discussion

OOWG 11/17/2016> At today's OO WG meeting, the change request was introduced by


Recommended Action Items

Resolution