20120627 TSC FHIR concall notes

From HL7 TSC
Revision as of 20:23, 27 June 2012 by Llaakso (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Attendees:

Woody Beeler
Bo Dagnall
Austin Kreisler
Lynn Laakso
Ron Parker
Brian Pech
Pat VanDyke


Goals for call:

  1. Understand what parts of the FHIR Governance documents vary from the SAIF GF
  2. Understand what the risks are that are associated with these variances
  3. Identify what if any steps the TSC can take to mitigate those risks.

Convened 5:07 EDT RP-Need to know which parts we're not doing and what may need to happen later

WB- Slide 3 bullet 4 key phrase: governance establishes rules and constraints. It is not responsible for operationally enforcing them or overseeing activities to ensure compliance. TSC approval of execution of specific resources does not violate this.

RP - what Grahame wants is a declared list agreed to of resources to be developed. Precepts on what is qualitative in a resource definition, define well-formedness, and then allow the developers to build.

WB - governance is a triangle and the methodology has to embed some of those rules to ensure that what comes out the pipe meets precepts

RP-methodology needs to ensure intents of governance and management. Separating viewpoints in the product line as it matures is important to keep those who are setting precepts from those building resources. Current TSC does both of these things. Need separate governance entity around which precepts about products are asserted. Need to establish governance and management boundaries better.

AK - hopes to educate TSC on how we currently have this problem.

BD joins

WB - feels we're correct in the spirit of the document Charlie assembled. The organizing documents may not have all the right words to call things constraints and guidelines but we can update in the review after the first year.

RP - Jane's work in risk assessment that the process yields what we need, will allow us to focus on governance points first. It may be the vehicle that uses this language first to aid acceptance.

AK - charge the FHIR Governance Board with ensure that governance points are created, working with FMG and methodology, that the TSC can use as a metric for evaluating the maturity of the governance process itself. Need to capture the knowledge and rules around developing FHIR resources in these governance points to formalize it in the institution of HL7 and becomes part of our body of knowledge.

RP - MnM will have no problem identifying where their points will be. FMG will likely also know where in "the process" moving constructively towards publication will know their points. FGB will want to know where to assess. In operational activity we will recognize the points.

AK - current ideas are informal about governing FHIR but the FHIR product line needs to formalize those.

RP - need to focus on the risk areas identified for first establishing governance. Moving from informing people on what needs to be done (task force) to instantiation.

AK - TSC approve M&C statements, approve charge to the product line about establishing governance points, then he and John Quinn will take it to the EC to get their recommendation on what the next step should be. May need to go to the Board as well. This is something new that we've not had before. This is a trial use of a product line with no formal mechanism around it yet. Don't want FHIR formalized in the GOM, but product lines, of which FHIR is our first instance. Don't know enough about what needs to be formalized around a product line to do that yet. Need to experiment on this for a short while.

RP - suggests setting check point in future for reviewing and setting structure in GOM. When we reach point blah blah blah we're ready to stand it up formally.

AK - when FHIR is DSTU, then we're ready, for example. Do we wish to write into the documents the charge to develop formal governance points over time? agreed. Austin will draft changes to the FGB and FMG M&C. MnM will also have to take on some additional responsibility to participate in creating governance points. May need to have regular TSC call to focus on governance aspects and separate from the management tasks.

Adjourned 17:35 PM EDT.

Copyright © Health Level Seven International ® ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. The reproduction of this material in any form is strictly forbidden without the written permission of the publisher.