Datatypes R2 Issue 69
o In Datatypes R2 we do not support original text in translations (approved 13-Sept 2006, Vocab & INM)
o Remove Nested Translations (approved 13-Sept 2006, Vocab & INM)
Ted: Should a translation have originalText? What is the intended use … or is it just from re-use of the data type?
Lloyd (per Grahame) suggested that when you did the translation did you use the originalText or the coded concept. Compelling to some, not to all. Stan – if implemented, would be algorithmic and thus would be consistently applied, no need to store that information.
MOTION (Ted Klein/Andy van Heusen): in Data Types R2, we do not support originalText in translations. VOTE 15-0-5 PASSED
Grahame: issue of nested translations. Lloyd supports the concept of translations of translations … a pedigree or history of the translation. Grahame & others feel that these nested translations are not desirable – adds complexity, will result in harmonization issues (e.g. with CEN).
Jane Curry: secondary forms of translations need another structure (e.g., ActRelationship).
MOTION (Richard Franck/Andy van Heusen): data types r2 will get rid of nested translations. Will recommend ActRelationships (Transform) for multiple translations with associated history. Will revisit this decision if production requirements express such needs.
DISCUSSION: clarify that ActRelationship supports nesting/history.
Lloyd: value of history of xlate: root text (user entered) -> local system xlation LOINC -> xlate to SNOMED for the wire. Path allows an understanding of “how” close the translation is; and can re-translate if additional capabilities are present.
VOTE 15-1-5 PASSED
Note that this was revisited in Data Types R2 Issue 80