Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Agenda

  • Upcoming Block Voteblock vote deferred
  • Get outstanding Personal Health Device IG JIRAs resolved
  • Device Module Discussions, continued


Attendance

John Garguilo, Ralf Herzog, Stefan Karl, Koichiro Matsumoto, Joe Quinn, Elliot Siver, Marti Velezis

Meeting Notes

  1. Looked again at 
    Jira
    serverJira
    columnIdsissuekey,summary,issuetype,created,updated,duedate,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution
    columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution
    serverId9b965702-34a7-3433-bf10-7f66fd69238c
    keyFHIR-33648
    . Marti looking for more clarity on the "approved jurisdiction": how it relates to related R5 DeviceDefinition field. This field in Device instances comes from the SDC group (not the HL7 SDC work, the IEEE-11072 Service-oriented Device Connectivity device point-of-care integration set of standards, better known in IHE and HL7 as SDPi - Service-oriented Device Point-of-Care Integration). An extension will be needed to accommodate the concept in R4. A goal in clarifying this is to minimize conceptual friction in R5, where DeviceDefinition resource is actively in play. Need to consult with subject matter experts in the related IEEE standards including Björn Andersen,and Kathrin Riech. Also Marti wished to discuss previous emails / Tulip messages from Todd Cooper 
  2. Extension issue: is there a problem with complex / multiple extensions? Consensus: no, it can be handled (to be discussed later )



References

Module: Devices

...