Attending: Mead Walker, Abdul-Malik Shakir, Don Lloyd, Dave Hamill, Ed Hammond

Conference Call
May 24, 2007

Attending: Mead Walker, Abdul-Malik Shakir, Don Lloyd, Dave Hamill, Ed Hammond

I raise the topic of the rules of order for the ARB. Abdul-Malik noted that we have stated that three members of the ARB are required for a quorum. Ed wonders about how the chair of the ARB has been selected. Abdul-Malik suggests that, under the new procedure the chair of the ARB would be appointed by the TSC. Ed suggests that the chair should be appointed from among the HL7 body. Abdul-Malik remembers that ARB members would be an M&N appointee, a Vocab appointee, the vice-chair of the TSC, and an InM appointee, an appointee of the Affiliate Council. I wonder whether we should have procedural rules. Abdul-Malik and Ed think it would be wise. Why not start with the PIC rules, and make modifications as needed. Abdul-Malik would be pleased to craft draft ARB procedures based on the PIC original. He will also add the “lore” regarding the composition of the ARB. We will continue with our current composition until told differently. Ed has heard that there was some notion of the ARB being fully appointed. He thinks it would good for there to be some representativeness. Abdul-Malik thinks it important for the committees to feel that the ARB representatives really represent their opinions. Abdul-Malik would like to see some kind of member advocate on the ARB. Ed agrees. He is not sure how such a person could be selected. Mead asks how the three current committees are slotted into the new sections. Should the composition of the ARB be re-thought? Abdul-Malik asks where the reorg material sits; we think it is on the T3F wiki. ( Mead will raise some of these issues with the T3F – use Woody as the contact. Mead will try to contact the various interested bodies. Ed suggests that the ARB realign to correspond to the sections that are constituting the new organization (three or four).

Mead asks what the main tasks of the Project Management Office are now, and how can the ARB help? From Don’s perspective, he is interested to know if the current round of scope statements have been approved, so he can do the balloting statement. Ed notes that there was a discussion with ANSI on balloting procedures; they said that many of our problems were based on HL7 procedures. Ed thinks that HL7 should put together a package for balloting that meets are needs, and get ANSI to agree to them. For example, the practice of having all negatives to be withdrawn, the processes for committee ballots. Dave has been helping Don with the balloting issues – the planning and project side of this should be in the PMO. Dave sees roll out of the Project Insight tool as the major task now. Dave now has a set of new scope statements that can be reviewed. Dave plans to have the tool out and running by September. He could then show the committees what is recorded, and then ask how much of the committee’s work it includes. Abdul-Malik thinks it important to have discussion of what should be constituted as a project. He also thinks there should be some thought of what the committee’s motivation for reporting to the PMO. Some committees may fear having to report status, and having to report progress. Don has had some discussions – that we not declare something a project until it has gone through an initial planning stage. There have been problems with submittals to ANSI having to be revised. Ed thinks one problem is that HL7 is reporting to ANSI at too detailed a level. Abdul-Malik thinks we may need to outline the life cycle of a project: what makes a project complete? Who does the document get sent to? Who approves? He suspects there are many answers. Dave asks if this has been done by the project life cycle taskforce. He uses their material for projects that are going to ballot. Dave will send out the life cycle document to the ARB, for its review. Dave will have the Project Insight tool up by September for prototype users, after that, he can start contacting committees to see which of their projects are in and are out. Abdul-Malik notes that things that go to ballot will be the highest priority, but he thinks that we should not loose site of activities that are not destined to go to ballot.