This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here

EHR R2 Comments

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Return to December 2011 Ballot Package

EHR Release 2 - Pre-Balloting Comment Collaboration Site

The comments on this page have been incorporated into the May2012 ballot comments worksheet. This page is no longer active.

Instructions

This wiki page has been created to support the collaboration and sharing of comments during the pre-ballot period. Please note:

  1. Comments shared on this wiki will be considered shared for the purposes of supporting the HL7 EHR-S Functional Model development process. Comments may, at the workgroup's discretion, be leveraged or used in any way to further the development efforts of the workgroup.
  2. Comments submitted to this wiki DO NOT REPLACE VOTING.
    • If you would like your comments to be considered formally as part of the standards balloting process you MUST also submit them through the balloting process with one of the five standards development organizations.
    • If you are not a member of one of the five balloting SDOs, you may either pay to submit your ballot, or you may request that a member submit your comments in their name. Note that members of these organizations may use their own discretion in selecting to submit comments.
  3. If you do not know how to post your comments to the wiki, you may email them to Helen Stevens (helen.stevens@gpinformatics.com) and she will be happy to post them for you.
  4. Please include your name and contact information when you post comments. A sample has been created below to provide a template.

Comments

  1. Comments submitted by John Doe (john.doe@email.com)
    • John Doe is a member of HL7 and understands that he will also submit these comments through the HL7 balloting when the HL7 ballot opens in April.
    • John Doe's Comments File
    1. John Doe's bullet point general comments
  2. Comments submitted by Steve Hufnagel (hufnagel@acm.org)
    • Steve Hufnagel is a member of HL7 and understands that he will also submit these comments through the HL7 balloting when the HL7 ballot opens in April.
    1. GENERAL: Conformance Criteria should be organized by SHALLs first, SHOULDs next, MAYs last
    2. GENERAL: A function includes all of its subfunctions; hence, remove duplicate subfunction referrals
    3. GENERAL (2012-1-22): Many column "H" conformance criteria are redundently (Unnecessarily) numbered with column "G"
    4. OV.1 SHOULD HAVE: The system SHALL conform to all TI functions; then, delete all TI.x conformance criteria
    5. RI.1 SHOULD HAVE: The system SHALL conform to all RI functions; then, delete all RI.x conformance criteria
    6. CP.2, CP.4, CP.5, CPS.2, CPS.5, AS.2, POP.2, POP3, POP.4, POP.5, POP.7 type should be "H" for Header
    7. POP.8, POP.9, POP.10, RI.2, RI.3, TI.2, TI.3, TI.4, TI.6, TI.7, TI.8, TI.9 type should be "H" for Header
  3. Comments submitted by Michael van der Zel (m.van.der.zel@umcg.nl)
    • Michael van der Zel is a member of HL7 and understands that he will also submit these comments through the HL7 balloting when the HL7 ballot opens in April.
    1. CP.3.4 has double reference to AS.5.3 with different description (row#249,250)
    2. RI.1.1.2 has double reference to TI.2.1.1.2 with different description (row#1656,1658)
    3. RI.1.1.3 has double reference to TI.2.1.1.3 with different description (row#1665,1666)
    4. TI.2 has double reference to TI.1.3 with different description (row#1940,1941)
    5. TI.2.1 has unnecessary circular reference to TI.2.1 (row#1944)