Stream: fmg
Topic: NIB
Grahame Grieve (Jul 09 2018 at 19:13):
we need to reballot all the 5 ballots of FHIR. We need to reballot patient because of a UTG related chance from vocab, not because of any patient related changes
Grahame Grieve (Jul 09 2018 at 19:13):
are all NIBS approved by committee?
Paul Knapp (Jul 09 2018 at 19:14):
Yes
Grahame Grieve (Jul 09 2018 at 19:14):
this is yes in behalf of who?
Grahame Grieve (Jul 09 2018 at 19:15):
FHIR-I just approved 3 of them
Grahame Grieve (Jul 09 2018 at 19:16):
actually, we also need to remove http://build.fhir.org/codesystem-marital-status.html
Grahame Grieve (Jul 09 2018 at 19:16):
I'll talk to PA about that
Lloyd McKenzie (Jul 09 2018 at 21:05):
FMG owns all of the NIBs except for STU for some reason
Lloyd McKenzie (Jul 09 2018 at 21:05):
Are we reballoting STU? If so, are we limiting the scope?
Lloyd McKenzie (Jul 09 2018 at 21:05):
And what are the scope limitations for the other ballots?
Grahame Grieve (Jul 09 2018 at 22:08):
I think the scope limitations on the other normative ballots is limited the same pool, to the changes since the last ballot; that's what we said and I see no reason to do anything different at this time.
Grahame Grieve (Jul 09 2018 at 22:09):
STU.... yes we are reballoting it. I don't know about scope... we don't have the capacity to deal with a huge round of comments, but when we laid out the plan, we did say that we would be balloting scope changes.... I haven't kept track of those, though
Lloyd McKenzie (Jul 09 2018 at 22:18):
Sent out a solicitation on the committer's chat
Brian Postlethwaite (Jul 11 2018 at 12:46):
What do we need from PA here?
From my understanding Patient needs to run through the ballot simply for the change to the binding to Marital status since the v3 codesystem has been resolved - will check on the call in the morning if there are other new trackers that need it too.
Does PA need to do a NIB for this one?
PA will be doing a NIB for the VhDir.
Does PA need to nominate which resources/content need to be in the R4 core STU ballot for that NIB that I understand is coming from FMG?
Brian Postlethwaite (Jul 11 2018 at 12:53):
(and the Patient contact role value-set definition, referenced by patient)
Brian Postlethwaite (Jul 11 2018 at 13:09):
And that the Patient $match operation was not meant to be marked as normative either.
There is a tracker GF#16039 that asks us to update a Patient operation from DAF to US Core, which makes sense, but which version of US Core, expecting R4, assuming that exists. Is this reference problematic?
Lloyd McKenzie (Jul 11 2018 at 13:31):
FMG will do the NIB for Patient and everything else in FHIR Core
Brian Postlethwaite (Jul 11 2018 at 20:34):
Do you need a list of the trackers related to patient to define the patient scope being re-balloted?
Grahame Grieve (Jul 11 2018 at 21:14):
only the actual changes are being reballoted for patient. That includes 4 things:
- removing the unused code system
- changing the v3 and v2 code system urls
- fixing the extensible binding to remove "other"
- marking match as not normative
Brian Postlethwaite (Jul 11 2018 at 21:16):
There was 1 other non-substantive item that we approved today GF#16041
Grahame Grieve (Jul 11 2018 at 21:25):
hah. I do not need to mention that one
Grahame Grieve (Jul 11 2018 at 21:26):
@Hans Buitendijk we need a statement from OO about what has changed with Observation please
Lloyd McKenzie (Nov 02 2020 at 21:18):
Did we put out a NIB for R4B? Deadline was Sunday...
Lynn Laakso (Nov 02 2020 at 21:20):
Deadline has been moved to Nov 8 since the WGM and ballot dates moved
Lloyd McKenzie (Nov 02 2020 at 21:21):
Oh good, so we don't have to beg forgiveness :) We'll need to put this at the top of the agenda for Wed.
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
