[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [emergency] Coordinating our Approach
As I was reviewing the list and wondering why no one had responded to my comment – I see that I sent it only to Don! So sorry, please let me know your thoughts on this approach. I would like to achieve a consensus on our approach forward on our call tomorrow (remember the half hour late start).
Thanks Don and I agree. I suggest that we focus on a TC-wide meeting to address extensions May 7. Prior to that time, I would like to see an email to the list fully describing the approach and how it works with current extension methods in standards that are effected. Much of this is already done in the documents posted in RIM documents. I’m hopeful that we can reach a final decision that day. Then we will discuss how a decision will effect next steps with each specification. All EM-TC members should have had time to be informed and knowledgeable by that time.
I do not think we want to delay the work of the TEP-SC to move the TEP Working Draft forward. We are hoping for a TC vote prior to the HL7 conference which begins May 12. It is written now to include extensions and will likely be the decision of the SC in any case. Be aware a decision may be coming forward soon – review Working Draft in the TEP-SC folder for status.
If other SCs feel this decision will affect their direction, I agree they should be put on hold. Discussion should occur on each of those lists as to whether they wish to postpone meetings.
Just a quick question to the group…
How do we want to handle coordination for the common approach to extensions.
I would request that we try to coordinate everything in one weekly meeting versus individual SC’s (IF, Msg&Notification, HAVE, TEP, etc.) meeting and discussing it.
Can we coordinate such as meeting and put other SC meetings on hold so we don’t overwhelm ourselves on meeting commitments?