2016-11-14 TSC Call Agenda

From HL7 TSC
Jump to: navigation, search

TSC Agenda/Minutes

Meeting Info/Attendees

Standing Conference Calls

TSC will hold a Conference Call at 11AM Eastern time, each Monday except during scheduled face-to-face Working Group Meetings unless otherwise noted at TSC_Minutes_and_Agendas.

GoToMeeting at https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/426505829 using VOIP
For those without access to microphone/speakers:
US: +1 (224)501-3318
Canada: +1 (647)497-9379
Italy: +39 0 230 57 81 80
Access Code: 426-505-829
GoToMeeting ID: 426-505-829
HL7 TSC Meeting Minutes

Location: GoToMeeting ID: 426-505-829

Date: 2016-11-14
Time: 11:00 AM U.S. Eastern
Facilitator: Ken McCaslin Note taker(s): Anne Wizauer
Quorum = chair + 5 including 2 SD represented yes/no
Chair/CTO ArB International Affiliate Rep Ad-Hoc
x Ken McCaslin x Tony Julian x Jean Duteau x Austin Kreisler
Regrets Wayne Kubick x Lorraine Constable x Giorgio Cangioli x Freida Hall, GOM Expert
. . . . Woody Beeler, TSC Member Emeritus
Domain Experts Foundation and Technology Structure and Semantic Design Technical and Support Services
Regrets Melva Peters x Russ Hamm x Calvin Beebe x Andy Stechishin
x John Roberts x Paul Knapp . Gora Datta Regrets Sandra Stuart
. . . .
ex officio Invited Guests Observers HL7 Staff
. Pat Van Dyke (HL7 Chair) w/vote . . obs1 x Anne Wizauer
. Chuck Jaffe (CEO) vote . . . obs2 .


. . . . .

Agenda

  1. Housekeeping
    • Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests)
    • Agenda review and approval -
    • Approve Minutes of 2016-11-07 TSC Call Agenda
  2. Review action items
    • Ken will reach out to OO and Patient Care to see if they would be willing to host the Eye Care work
    • Discuss how to communicate separation of concerns on upcoming call. Paul asks for people to think about examples of where we see violations of the principle.
  3. Approval items from last week's e-vote referred for discussion:
    • Project Approval Request by the OO WG of the SSD-SD for Laboratory Results Interface Implementation Guide at Project Insight 1294 and TSC Tracker 12327
      • Referred by Austin:
        • 1) Missing SD approval date (Note from Anne: Resolved. SD approved 10/18)
        • 2) Since when is FM responsible for Privacy and Security?
    • Review of 2017Jan Ballot Items at TSC Tracker 12330
      • Freida provided notes in the spreadsheet (Anne will display)
      • ARB:
        • Should we continue to allow those who cannot keep up to ballot new material? Attachments, CIC, Patient Care, Security, Structured Docs?
        • The other question we have is, how doe sa new product type get all the way to a ballot request (even with noted ARB review needed) without going through any other discussion?
  4. Approval items from last week's e-vote approved 7/0/0 with SSD-SD, ARB, Austin, Wayne, T3SD, Freida, and DESD voting?
  5. Approval Items for This Week:
  6. Discussion topics:
    • Report from Paul, Calvin, Melva on requirements for logging issues/comments across standards
    • Continue TSC SWOT Review
    • Revisit PSS for "Revise Process to Withdraw Protocol Specifications"
      • TSC reviewed/did not approve because of the following concerns: 1) lack of project facilitator; 2) no co-sponsor approvals. Ken will talk to Dave about being the facilitator. Andy will coordinate with publishing and PIC regarding cosponsoring. ARB will add to their agenda as well.
      • Original issue was CCOW but once that was resolved the issue lost steam
    • Identifying and communicating essential rules (Wayne)
  7. Open Issues List

Minutes

  • Agenda review and approval -
    • No additions
  • Approve Minutes of 2016-11-07 TSC Call Agenda
    • Approved via general consent
  • Review action items
    • Ken will reach out to OO and Patient Care to see if they would be willing to host the Eye Care work
      • Ken reached out. OO thought that was a good idea. Ken will reach out to the eye care folks with that result.
    • Discuss how to communicate separation of concerns on upcoming call. Paul asks for people to think about examples of where we see violations of the principle.
  • Approval items from last week's e-vote referred for discussion:
    • Project Approval Request by the OO WG of the SSD-SD for Laboratory Results Interface Implementation Guide at Project Insight 1294 and TSC Tracker 12327
      • Referred by Austin:
        • 1) Missing SD approval date (Note from Anne: Resolved. SD approved 10/18)
        • 2) Since when is FM responsible for Privacy and Security?
          • Austin notes the security WG should be responsible. Paul agrees but one of the FM cochairs is also a security cochair. John notes CBCC sometimes gets in on it as well. Paul states the privacy and security information for consent goes in a segment; discussion over who owns the segment. Freida states it's adding the CON segment in chapters 4 and 7. Paul would expect that it should really say CBCC. Lorraine suggests V2 management group should decide.
          • MOTION to approve the project in principle but ask the WG to work with V2 management regarding the CON segment approval: Lorraine/Austin
          • VOTE: All in favor
          • ACTION: Calvin will follow up with Hans
    • Review of 2017Jan Ballot Items at TSC Tracker 12330
      • Freida provided notes in the spreadsheet (Anne will display)
      • ARB:
        • Should we continue to allow those who cannot keep up to ballot new material? Attachments, CIC, Patient Care, Security, Structured Docs?
        • The other question we have is, how doe sa new product type get all the way to a ballot request (even with noted ARB review needed) without going through any other discussion?
          • Reviewed document from Freida
          • MOTION to change 1274 to Freida's suggested name and approve item for ballot: Freida/Paul
          • Discussion over PBS metrics column. Lynn clarifies that these are items not related to the current ballot item.
          • VOTE: All in favor
          • MOTION to change 1295 to suggested title and accept as ballot item: Freida/Calvin
          • VOTE: All in favor
          • MOTION to change 1261 to suggested title and accept as ballot item: Freida/Paul
          • VOTE: all in favor
          • MOTION to change 1181 to suggested title and accept as ballot item: Freida/Calvin
            • Austin notes that the name suggests shift in scope. Andy believes it is covered by the scope statement as he has been tracking the project. Freida notes that it is comment only.
          • VOTE: All in favor
          • MOTION to add PI IDs to all updated, acceptable ballot titles throughout without further vote (except unapproved projects): Freida/Calvin
          • VOTE: All in favor
          • MOTION to approve 1058 as it is without product type for balloting: Lorraine/Paul
          • VOTE: All in favor
          • Do we want to add Requirements as a product type? Lorraine states we should wait until we complete the review of the SAIF matrix. ARB will be reviewing.
          • MOTION to approve 1253 as is but send to ARB regarding product type: Calvin/Paul
          • VOTE: All in favor
          • MOTION to accept 859 with suggested title and accept as ballot item: Freida/Calvin
          • VOTE: All in favor
          • MOTION to accept 773 with original title and accept as ballot item: Tony/Freida
          • VOTE: All in favor
          • 914 accepted per previous motion
          • 1264 is pending project approval and correction of typo
          • 1183 and 1279 accepted per previous motion
          • MOTION to approve 977 and 976 as suggested and accept as ballot item: Freida/Calvin
          • VOTE: All in favor
            • Discussion over expired DSTUs. Should we have some process to categorize expired DSTUs? Expired DSTUs become a PBS metric; the original thinking was that DSTUs should go normative before they expire. Perhaps we need to reconsider this. There is no way for a WG to indicate that they intend for the TSC to expire.
            • ACTION: Freida will talk to project services about how to manage the issue/add process to indicate that DSTU is expiring that that's the intention. Austin asks what we do with DSTUs that have no uptake or intent to move forward? Lynn notes that it should be withdrawn.
  • Discussion topics: Referred to next week
  • Adjourned at 12:02 pm Eastern

Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
  • .
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items


© 2016 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.

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.