Minutes - FHIR Validation Group 2022-05-12
From Health Level 7 Belgium Wiki
Revision as of 09:04, 12 May 2022 by Costateixeira (talk | contribs) (Created page with "Thursday, 12th May 2022, 10:00 CET = Agenda = * Reschedule of the meeting on the 26th May (Bank holiday): We can't find an ideal schedule and we meet on the 9th of June. * AC...")
Thursday, 12th May 2022, 10:00 CET
Agenda
- Reschedule of the meeting on the 26th May (Bank holiday): We can't find an ideal schedule and we meet on the 9th of June.
- ACP Project proposal
Participants
- Filoretta Velica
- Hanne Vuegen
- Veerle Michiels
- Bart Decuypere
- Anne Nerenhausen
- José Costa Teixeira
- Philippe Baise
Minutes
- Reschedule of the meeting on the 26th May (Bank holiday): We can't find an ideal schedule and we meet on the 9th of June.
Presentation of the ACP Project Proposal
- Hypothetical question: If the PICT profile turns out to be incompatible with Manzana, what do we do? - we'll need to create 2 profiles (independent or interdependent, depending on the need) - if we find that ScoreResult is too strict, then we can still change ScoreResult.
- We expect that this will not the case for the ScoreResult because ScoreResult is not specific for Manzana.
- Voting on approval of the proposal:
- We can validate the project proposal as usual:
- The Validation Working Group finds no objections today.
- Each group member will review the project proposal and will come back with any objections they may find by the 26th May.
- on the 27th of May, the Proposal will be considered approved if no objections arrive meanwhile. If some objections arrive, it will be handled on the meeting of the 9th June.
- We can validate the project proposal as usual:
- New idea:
- We could have in the Validation meeting a 2-minute overview of all ongoing standardization projects - kind of a "report out" from the Technical WGs to the Validation WG. Just to inform the status.
- We'd reserve 15 minutes in each Validation meeting to listen to the reports and provide esssential comment (longer debates would be in the working groups)
- The responsibles could be the group facilitators, but it is not clear - so we give it a few weeks to consider this new proposal (status report from the Projects/WGs to the Validation Working Group) and we'll rediscuss in the next meeting.
