We need to address the problem of how new content is added into US Core. (See http://hl7.org/fhir/us/core/future-of-us-core.html)
This step is where the project team seeks approval from US Realm and/or Cross-Group Projects that the proposed profiles or guide make sense to eventually be added to US Core.
-what does it meant to be included in US Core? We need to come up with criteria for what can/should be included and what wouldn't be.
The project team does the work to get their content all the way to a publishable state. This might include balloting and publishing via current HL7 processes or it may be external to HL7.
-what if the implementation guide needs to be changed to bring it into conformance with US Core? Something more needs to be done than just be published and added to US Core.
Show that some number (3 or more?) of implementers have implemented or "are committed" to implement. This needs to implementation in a production environment, i.e not just tested and plans for the future.
Receive formal approval that the content is ready to add to US Core.
-do we need to have a step where the community gets a say in whether the content should be added? Does the initial candidacy step fulfill this need?
-what if the content needs some changes to be added to US Core? That probably requires a new ballot.
Work with the US Core project team to integrate new profiles/requirements/guide into US Core. The project team needs to handle the STU comments and the ballot process and assist with the publication of their content into the new US Core.
-does adding the content to US Core require that US Core gets reballoted? Is it just creating a US Core supplement that will be completely "folded in" after the next US Core ballot?
-does US Core need to have parts of it moving along the normative track at different times?