Page tree
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Subcommittee Lead: Jessica Bota 

Supporting TSMG Co-Chair: Reuben Daniels 


Tuesday 9:00-10:00PM UTC

Tuesday 4:00-5:00PM USA ET

Wednesday 7:00-8:00AM AEST

Wednesday 10:00-11:00AM NZDT   

See for meeting details.


Attendee type:

M - TSMG Member

O -Observer / Guest


P - present

A - Apologies

X - (Apologies with Proxy)



M (Co-Chair)




Apelon, Inc.
MPNational Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
MPDavera Gabriel 
HL7 International
HL7 Germany


Klein Consulting
OPHL7 International
OPCanada Health Infoway
National Library of Medicine
OPWashington State Department of Health
OPAbdullah Rafiqi ICF

Antitrust statement

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 


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."

Agenda Topics

Meeting was recorded

Agenda Outline

Time Allocation


Agenda Item
  • Rollcall & Proxies
  • Note that meetings are recorded
  • Approval of meeting minutes
  • Sprint 2 of UTG Jira development items is in progress, focusing on release tracking
    • Scheduling meeting for mid March to define release tracking requirements
    • Met with Lawrence to get started with Jira automation development
      • Priorities are automating creation of branch and cloning, as well as automating commit and push after editing changes
        • May eliminate need for Sourcetree
      • May be possible to edit resources directly in GitLab, eliminating dependency on cloning a local copy
Subcommittee Work in Progress40JB
  • Task force recommendation review and implementation (voting, quorums, WG health, etc.): UTG Task Force Recommendations to TSC 
    • Tracked by HSCR-155 - Getting issue details... STATUS and its subtasks
    • Outreach subcommittee reviewed draft to Management Groups and is approved to be sent
    • Next Steps
      • Determine approach for asking Management Groups to provide OSGs
        • Send email to Management Groups for Product Family OSGs
      • Ask Rob and Peter for help recruiting for Realm-Based OSG
      • Ask TSMG main call for Vocab/TSMG members for the Vocab OSG
        • Suggest all members/co-chairs be in Vocab OSG (unless in another OSG)
      • TSC clarification
        • Need to ask for clarification for ad hoc OSGs and how OSGs may change but membership does not automatically refresh on tickets already in Consensus Review
        • Expectations for when members of an OSG need to change
  • THO release schedule
    • Need input from TSC/HQ and they have requested some information from TSMG on documentation and level of effort 
      • Info sent to Rob and Bryn who will follow up with TSC
  • THO post-release cleanup
    • Need policy for cleaning up THO branches (created to commit content changes via UTG process)
    • Suggest removing branches from 1.0.0 and 2.0.0 releases at minimum: 
    • Consideration for later: Need a policy for old proposals because branches will become very outdated and cause issues for both submitters and the Terminology Curator due to large number of merge conflicts over time
    • Feedback from Marc (aka Terminology Curator) - will also follow up with Grahame
      • There are likely four options
        • Keeping all the branches
        • Removing all or some branches in bitbucket
        • Removing all or some branches in github (but keep in bitbucket)
          • Currently leaning towards this option and removing all github branches except for current and previous release
          • Lisa suggests an announcement thread in Zulip #terminology/announcements to say this is the approach we are thinking of taking (which would also help with THO release announcements, interface changes, new external terminologies, etc.)
        • Removing all or some branches in both bitbucket and github
    • Will raise option #3 for a vote tomorrow
  • Vocab suggests that TSMG require all code systems to have a Steward
    • UTG submitters would need to get WG approval from the Steward to propose changes to the code system
    • Discussed on main TSMG call but no one wanted to make a motion to make this a policy
    • Steward definition
      • The WG responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the code system (not to be confused with Publisher who makes the content available)
        • This implies that the WG has the domain expertise/knowledge related to the code system
      • The primary point of contact for questions or issues with the code system
    • FYI: Vocab added an extension for steward, there is a proposal to update the definition of publisher (which was intended to represent steward) and remove the extension
    • Might be a good idea to get a count of how many code systems in THO do not have a steward value
    • How should we assign WGs for code systems without a Steward? 

      • Is Vocab the Steward for all V3 code systems?
      • Many things in V3 used in FHIR and V2 things used in V3 which complicates things
      • Ted suggests that the right thing to do is grind through all of them to assign a steward and since things cross product family lines then Vocab may need to be Steward and approach the grind that way
      • Approach Vocab to be Steward for any code system without one currently
        • Could be significant work if many changes are proposed to these code systems
      • What about retired? Must first be made active, needs further discussion
  • Add missing Value Sets for cda-core-2.0
    • Review correspondence on UP-116 - Getting issue details... STATUS
    • Probably need to make a corresponding code system
    • May be able to clarify that they are active value sets used by CDA and previously used as a V3 concept domain but are now considered retired in V3 via the <definition>
    • Probably want them only on CDA tabs
    • We can add missing codes to and create the value sets based on the concept domain code system
      • May need OID for concept domain code system, need assistance filling in property values from Lisa/SD
    • Will collaborate with Jess, Lisa, Marc, Rob H and others to get this task done. Ted has more info on missing attributes
  • Workflow process for use of internal code system identifiers in FHIR and beyond (Did not discuss) 
    • Need to determine what kind of content should/should not be added to THO (i.e. if used in a balloted IG)
    • See UTG & THO Subcommittee for related resources
      • LN: For USCDI, once things are mature then those value sets should be in THO. Also an issue with duplication causing things not to align.
   Adjournment0 JBCall adjourned at 5:03PM EST. Next call in one week at 4:00PM EST March 15, 2022.

Supporting Documents

Outline Reference

Supporting Document

Minute Approval2022-03-01 UTG/THO Subcommittee Agenda and Minutes

Action items

  •  Jessica Bota Look into adding Terminology Announcements substream on Zulip (see if we can restrict posting)
  • Michael Faughn Determine how many code systems in THO do not have a Steward extension