Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Attendance can be found Here

Co-Chair and Key Participant information can be found on the Agenda found Here

Discussion items


TimeItemWhoNotes
11:07Value Set Binding Semantics Project - Review Task ListChair
  • Confirm conformance involvement with Frank Oemig and Robert Snelick , then update PSS - COMPLETE
  • Confirm location of VBS project document repository - COMPLETE, repository is located here Vocabulary Binding Semantics (VBS) documents
  • Reuben follow up with FHIR-I on interest, which they have denied
  • Reuben to transfer word PSS information to the confluence based PSS. The legacy PSS is #630
  • Reuben emailed group to find a consistent meeting time

Project interest/validity assessmentALL
  • The last few VBS conference calls have not had quorum.
  • Frank confirmed that the time conflicted with other obligations. However, the context and world has changed. The group needs to talk more about vocabulary management and clearly define what a "value set" is as we don't have that for value set like we do for code system. Frank recommends merging this effort with the Value Set Expansion project.
    • Rob believes this project should focus on bindings.
    • Ted agrees, and comments that ISO had a binding project that was waiting for the HL7 effort to make progress, the project was then cancelled as HL7 made no progress. As part of his role at ISO, he prepared a presentation about binding and the group reviewed those slides
      • The presentation is located here. Summary of slides here for convenience:
        • "Binding" is the association of one ore more data elements to an identified collection of coded concepts withing a specific business context.
        • Includes information to make the collection content fully deterministic
        • includes rules for strictness of adherence to the use of the identified collection
        • includes guidance on the development of additional subsets or extended content of subsequent derived collections and uses.
  • Chair uses prerogative to focus back on the question at hand (project interest/validity assessment)
    • Rob McClure commits to re-engaging tot he project. Rob agrees with Frank that we should align this effort with the expansion effort, to answer straightforward questions like "How do you know which expansion you should use?"
    • Group recommends that project lead engages members of the Structure Document WG (e.g., Lisa R. NelsonEmma Jones ), who raised existing binding issues in the joint meeting with vocabulary. In doing so, the project will be informed by these use cases and be able to provide guidance for future implementers.
    • Ted agrees and thinks that we need to engage the community more closely to get binding uses case in the wild instead of trying to solve all possible binding scenarios.
    • Reuben confirmed that the output of the effort will be a guidance document.
    • Carmela recommends we look at how each of the bullets above (from Ted) occur in each product family occurs today, then use that to inform the guidance given to align those efforts into a standardized approach
  • Chair summarizes the go forward path from here:
      • Carmela makes a motion to NOT move forward with binding PSS as currently defined, but vocabulary authors and maintains a confluence page documenting current binding practices and identify apparent issues (e.g., conformance in FHIR).
        • Susan seconds and amends that new PSS is cancelled
        • Rob amends that we close the current project 630
      • Motion carries passes 7-1-0






Action items

  • No labels