Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC)
National Library of Medicine (US)
Professional Associations, such as HL7, which bring together competing entities are subject to strict scrutiny under applicable antitrust laws. HL7 recognizes that the antitrust laws were enacted to promote fairness in competition and, as such, supports laws against monopoly and restraints of trade and their enforcement. Each individual participating in HL7 meetings and conferences, regardless of venue, is responsible for knowing the contents of and adhering to the HL7 Antitrust Policy as stated in §05.01 of the Governance and Operations Manual (GOM).
Minutes Approved as Presented
2022-02-02 TSMG Agenda and Minutes
This is to approve minutes via general consent. "You have received the minutes. Are there any corrections to the minutes? (pause) Hearing none, if there are no objections, the minutes are approved as printed."
Grahame is resolving ~400 errors in the build via
Getting issue details...STATUS
Please review above ticket and approve in minutes if we want to get these fixes in prior to the release (highly recommended)
RD/JB: Moving to approve this ticket. BR Seconds Motion passes 7-0-0
It is also possible that Vocab and FMG should be the sponsor instead of TSMG
Reuben moving "Using X with FHIR" pages to THO
Jess moving Identifier Systems to THO, Lloyd to help with moving Passport Numbers
RD will have more info about this process in next week's TSMG meeting
Vocab WG follow-up: Policy Requiring Identification of Stewards for HL7 (Internal) Code Systems
Vocab WG should decide whether THO code systems and value sets should have the steward as mandatory. Would help with knowing who to follow up with in the UTG process.
In Vocab WG - Motion passed: Vocab WG recommends that TSMG implement a rule stating that: Every HL7 code system in THO must have a steward WG. The steward WG has to be one of the WGs that are authorized to propose making changes to an HL7 code system in THO.
THO release schedule
THO was originally designed to be released "on demand" although there has been a recent push to align with ballot cycles
Should ask Dan and Viet to weigh in as it affects the implementation community
RD: suggesting there are 3 dates per year guaranteed, and then provide the flexibility to add additional releases on an ad hoc basis based on community needs.
PJ: there are some changes out of HL7 control like external code systems that may by necessity trigger a release
TK: external code system changes are mostly metadata, the most important component which may rise to the need for a change would be if a url changed
optimally... be dependable but also nimble to be responsible to the community needs
RD: to BR - please ask the TSC about this topic / approach, so TSMG can vote on this next week
Status updates (no changes from last week)
Onboarding new development resource, Lawrence, to help with Jira automation
Will create business requirements for a UTG Editor
Sprint 2 of UTG Jira development items with a focus on release tracking in progress
Refining current implementation of release tracking
Change Request Sponsorship
TK: Change requests require WG sponsors per TSC rules. Stewards of resource are identified, but change requests do not necessarily come from that Steward. To remedy - Ted is asking the TSMG to consider whether it might be useful to allow co-sponsors of change proposals. At present, there is only one slot for approval and this may not be the source of the change need.
Ted would like to use the JIRA auto-validation workflow to move change requests to the next step via machine (vs manual) method
RD: is the role of a Steward is to ensure that no change can happen to an asset?
TK: the (prior) harmonization process indicated the Steward needed to be a party to the discussion. Ted added a link to the minutes of the meeting when the decision was made re: the proposal in the request. There are different outcomes possible with combinations of "must approve" for one or both co-sponsors, links to meeting minutes etc. Ted is asking the TSMG to tease these options out to specify.
Role of oversight group would be to make decisions without having a steward "present" in a meeting, and could be enabled in the JIRA workflow through mandatory notification of stewards. proceeding with the assumption that everyone (in a meeting) making a decision will have reviewed the minutes, or at least has access to all the requisite information supporting the decision.
RB: changes to artefacts should generate a new version - can we use the version to obviate the need for approvals by all?
DG moves: As an interim measure pending TSMG establishing policies on stewards, in order for a UTG change request to be submitted, there must be one or more sponsors documented in the ticket for that change request. Additionally there needs to be a link to the minutes of one or more of the sponsors, documenting the approval of the change request. One of the change request sponsors must be an HL7 WG or the TSMG. RB Seconds. Motion passes 7-0-0