see my post on the official FHIR Product director blog: #FHIR Report from Madrid Working Group Meeting
Guest post: My close friend Lloyd wanted to share his thoughts on hearing the news about Woody.
My recollections of Woody are similar to Grahame’s.
I started my HL7 international journey in 2000. In my case, it was in an attempt to understand how I could design my v2 profiles so they would be well aligned with v3. I quickly learned the foolishness of that notion, but became enamored of the v3 effort.
HL7 was an extremely welcoming organization and Woody played a big part in that welcome. I was a wet-behind the ears techy from Canada and he was an eminent physician, former organization chair and respected elder of the organization. Yet he always treated me as an equal. Over the years, we collaborated on tooling, data models, methodology, processes and the challenges of getting things done in an organization with many diverse viewpoints. In addition to his sense of humour and willingness to get his hands dirty, I remember Woody for his passion. He really cared about making interoperability work. He was willing to listen to anyone who was trying to “solve the problem”, but he had little patience for those who he didn’t sense had similar motivations.
His openness to new ideas is perhaps best exemplified by his reaction to the advent of FHIR. Woody was one of the founding fathers of v3 and certainly one of its most passionate advocates. Over his time with HL7, he invested years of his life advocating, developing tools, providing support, educating, guiding the development of methodology and doing whatever else needed to be done. Given his incredible investment in the v3 standard, it would not be surprising for him to be reluctant to embrace the new up-and-comer that was threatening to upset the applecart. But he responded to the new development in typical Woody fashion. He asked probing questions, he evaluated the intended outcomes and considered whether the proposed path was a feasible and efficient way to satisfy those outcomes. Once he had satisfied himself with the answers, he embraced the new platform. Woody took an active role in forming the FHIR governance structures served as one of the first co-chairs of the FHIR govenance board. To Woody, it was the outcome that mattered, not his ego.
Woody embraced life. He loved traveling with his wife Selby (and his kids or grandkids when he could). He loved new challenges. He loved his work, but he wasn’t afraid to play either. He was an active participant in after-hours WGM poker games.
It was with reluctance that Woody stepped back from his HL7 activities after his diagnosis with cancer, but as he expressed it at the time, he had discovered that he only had time for two of three important things – fighting his illness, spending time with his family and doing the work he loved with HL7. He chose the right two priorities.
While version 3 might not have had the success we thought it would when we were developing it, the community that evolved under HL7 v3 and the knowledge we gleaned in that effort has formed the essential foundation and platform that enabled the building of FHIR. I am grateful to have had Woody in my life – as a mentor, a co-worker and a friend. I am grateful too for everything he helped build. Woody’s priority was to focus on really making a difference. In that he has set the bar very high for the rest of us.
Thank you for everything you’ve done Woody. We miss you.
Today, Woody Beeler passed away after battling cancer for a few years. Woody was a friend, an inspiration, and my mentor in health care standards, and I’m going to miss him.
I first met Woody in 2001 at my first HL7 meeting. It was Woody who drew me into the HL7 community, and who educated me about the impact that standards could have. Many people at HL7 have told me the same thing – it was Woody that inspired them to become part of the community.
When I remember Woody, I think of his humour, his passion for developing the best standards possible, and his commitment to building the community out of which standards arise. And I remember the way Woody was prepared to roll up his sleeves and get his hands dirty to get the job done. To the point of learning significant new technical skills long after retirement age had come and gone. Truly, a Jedi master at healthcare standards.
For many years, Woody was the v3 project lead for HL7. Woody wasn’t blind to the issues with v3, but it was the best option available to the community at the time – so he gave everything he had to bring v3 to completion. And it was Woody who mentored me through the early stages of establishing the FHIR community.
It’s my goal that in the FHIR project we’ll keep Woody’s commitment to community and healthcare outcomes – and doing whatever is needed – alive.
(pic h/t Rene Spronk, who maintains a history of HL7 v3 – see http://ringholm.com/docs/04500_en_History_of_the_HL7_RIM.htm)
Now that we’ve published Release 3 of FHIR, it’s time for us to consider our main priorities for the next FHIR release. This is my draft list of product priorities that we’ll be discussing – and trying to execute – at the Madrid meeting next week:
- Normative: push to normative for
- Foundation / API / XML / JSON / Bundle / OperationOutcome
- Terminology Service (ValueSet / CodeSystem / ExpansionProfile)
- StructureDefinition / CapabilityStatement
- Patient / RelatedPerson / Practitioner / Organization / ?Endpoint
- Position a core set of clinical resources (‘health base’?) for normative in R5 (or Observation | AllergyIntolerance | MedicationStatement normative for R4?)
- JSON: ? use manifest for extensions, parameters resource (see blog post) (note that discussion on this didn’t go very well – probably will be dropped)
- RDF: more ontology bindings + resolve status of JSON-LD
- Data Analytics: support for a bulk data analysis bridge format (Apache Parquet?)
- API: better control over retrieving graphs, and value added query support (tabular format?)
- Patterns: change the W5 framework to a pattern (logical model), tie the patterns to ontology, and use of patterns to drive more consistency (and how to do this without decreasing quality)
- Services: more services. Candidates: conformance, registry, personal health summary?, etc?
- Deployment: get a clear standards path for smart on fhir / cds-hooks (and alignment with UMA/Heart)
- FM: work on alignment between FM resources and the rest of FHIR
Note that this list is written anticipating that the normal standards development process occur, and the content as a whole is maintained. I’d expect that this would amount to 1000s of tasks. So this list is not a list of ‘what will change in R4’, but an indication of where particular focus will be applied by the FHIR leadership (so don’t be concerned if a particular issue of yours is not on this list, as long as it’s in gForge)