HL7 Review Task Force 2008-06-27: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Chrisdcarr (talk | contribs) |
|||
| (15 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Attendees== | ==Attendees== | ||
Lisa Spellman, HIMSS | * Yongjian Bao PhD, GE | ||
Chris Carr, RSNA | * Chris Lindop, GE | ||
Nichole Drye-Mayo, RSNA | * Lisa Spellman, HIMSS | ||
* Chris Carr, RSNA | |||
* Nichole Drye-Mayo, RSNA | |||
==Minutes== | |||
===Reconciling PAM and SWF=== | |||
* Comparison of Trigger Events | |||
** Yongjian Bao provided a [ftp://ftp.ihe.net/CoChairs/hl7_task_force/PAM%20vs%20SWF.xls spreadsheet comparing trigger events in SWF and PAM] | |||
** Work through with Task Force on Next tcon | |||
===Cleaning Up Inconsistencies in Text about HL7 Versioning in Rad TF and ITI TF=== | |||
* Comparison of Rad TF section 2.3 and 2.4 (Message Control and Conventions) with ITI TF Appendix C | |||
** Goal to develop shared, consistent text on managing version differences | |||
*** Needs a clear statement on how HL7 version number attribute is defined and handled | |||
*** Clarify requirements for acknowledgment mode for both sender and received side (currently only defined for receiver) | |||
*** Clarify notation and other inconsistencies in the texts | |||
** Use Rad TF text as a basis for normative text for systems using HL7 v. 2.3.1 and use ITI TF Appendix C as starting point for rules about using HL7 v 2.5 | |||
** Goal is to have a section of ITI TF as the "canonical" statement of managing HL7 versions; Rad TF and others (Eye Care, Cardio, etc) would reference this section | |||
===Next Meeting=== | |||
* '''Thursday, July 17, 9am CDT''' | |||
* PAM vs SWF: Comparison of Trigger Events | |||
* Proposal for reconciling text on handling HL7 versions in ITI and Rad TFs | |||
[[HL7 Review Task Force]] | |||
Latest revision as of 09:32, 31 July 2008
Attendees
- Yongjian Bao PhD, GE
- Chris Lindop, GE
- Lisa Spellman, HIMSS
- Chris Carr, RSNA
- Nichole Drye-Mayo, RSNA
Minutes
Reconciling PAM and SWF
- Comparison of Trigger Events
- Yongjian Bao provided a spreadsheet comparing trigger events in SWF and PAM
- Work through with Task Force on Next tcon
Cleaning Up Inconsistencies in Text about HL7 Versioning in Rad TF and ITI TF
- Comparison of Rad TF section 2.3 and 2.4 (Message Control and Conventions) with ITI TF Appendix C
- Goal to develop shared, consistent text on managing version differences
- Needs a clear statement on how HL7 version number attribute is defined and handled
- Clarify requirements for acknowledgment mode for both sender and received side (currently only defined for receiver)
- Clarify notation and other inconsistencies in the texts
- Use Rad TF text as a basis for normative text for systems using HL7 v. 2.3.1 and use ITI TF Appendix C as starting point for rules about using HL7 v 2.5
- Goal is to have a section of ITI TF as the "canonical" statement of managing HL7 versions; Rad TF and others (Eye Care, Cardio, etc) would reference this section
- Goal to develop shared, consistent text on managing version differences
Next Meeting
- Thursday, July 17, 9am CDT
- PAM vs SWF: Comparison of Trigger Events
- Proposal for reconciling text on handling HL7 versions in ITI and Rad TFs