HL7 Standards Process (was RE: EDIINT and HIPAA)

["Rishel,Wes" <wes.rishel@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

As the chair-elect of HL7 I would like to respond to DB's question about HL7
process.

HL7 has two kinds of specifications that are published using slighly
different processes: a Standard is submitted to ANSI for certification once
it has passed ballot; a Recommendation is published by HL7 but is not
submitted to ANSI and does not become an ANSI standard. Some Recommendations
have had substantial acceptance among the HL7 community, including it's
"lower level protocols" which define ways to reliably pass discrete messages
over RS-232 and TCP, and were published sometime in the early 1990s.

A Standard originates under the sponsorship of a Technical Committee. If HL7
were to create a Standard for EDIINT it would be the Control/Query
committee. It is balloted at the committee level. (Actually anyone can
participate in the committee ballot, but in practice those who choose to do
so are usually those who participate in, or follow the work of, the
Technical Committee.) When it passes a committee level ballot it is
submitted for ballot by the full HL7 Working Group (which is the entire
organization). If it passes at this level it is automatically submitted to
ANSI for certification. The ANSI review allows time for public comment, but
it is primarily a certification that the process was fair and consistent
with our bylaws. To date, have never had an issue arise that prevented or
delayed the certification process.

In addition to Technical Committees HL7 has Special Interest Groups. Gunther
is co-chair of our SIG on security. Strictly speaking, a SIG cannot initiate
the balloting of a standard; but SIGs can prepare such a document, and
obtain the consent of a Technical Committee which sponsors the ballot.

The other kind of document, the Recommendation, is easier to get out the
door. It can be originated by a SIG, and it has only one level of balloting.
The majority that is required to pass a Recommendation is less severe than
the majority required to pass a Standard (67% vs. 90%).

Ballots are conducted using the Web. Assuming that both ballots pass an
energetic committee can easily complete the entire process in two of our
three-per-year Working Group meetings (roughly 8 months elapsed time). (Of
course most committees have substantial time invested in debating the
document before it begins the process.)

Most of the meetings required at certain points in the process can be
handled using conference calls; in theory a REALLY motivated committee could
accomplish the two-level ballot in five months and then wait about three
months for ANSI certication. (That is a theoretical figure that has never
been realized in practise.)

Recommendations can be passed in roughly four months.

Best regards,

Wes Rishel
Research Director
Healthcare Industry Research & Advisory Services
GartnerGroup
Alameda, CA
Client inquiries: call +1-203-316-1288 or email to indapps@xxxxxxxxxxx
wes.rishel@xxxxxxxxxxx
510 522 8135
510 521 2423 (fax)



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dick Brooks [mailto:dick@xxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 10:27 AM
> To: Gunther Schadow
> Cc: Rik Drummond; Kepa Zubeldia; CLEM; Gary Crough; Beth Morrow;
> David@Drummondgroup. Com; GISB1@xxxxxxx; ietf-ediint@xxxxxxx; Dick
> Brooks
> Subject: RE: EDIINT and HIPAA
> 
> 
> 
> <DB> I'm not familiar with the HL7 standards process, all of 
> my experience
> has been with IETF, DISA, GISB and recently ebXML. Each of these
> organizations has a different process for developing standards. If we
> brought AS2 to HL7 today, how long would it take to become an 
> ANSI standard?
> I would like to read HL7's operational process document, can 
> you provide a
> pointer?
> </DB>
>