Negation Requirements Project Minutes 8 February 2017
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Back to Negation Minutes
|HL7 PC-CIMI-POC Meeting Minutes
Location: PC call line
Time: 11:00-12:00 ET
|Facilitator||Jay Lyle||Note taker(s)||Jay Lyle|
|y||Jay Lyle||JP Systems|
- Ballot target: DAM; support for policy
- FHIR/CDA alignment
- Query sources
- Lisa's proposal: simply allow terminology in CCDA; this will support alignment with FHIR
- CCDA not ever easy to change, but industry is looking at it. If it can change, now is the time.
- Analysis positions:
- we want negation to be explicit (not buried in precoordinated terminology)
- we want negation to be concrete (not modeled as a Boolean)
- this means specifications should represent negation explicitly and concretely, or provide instructions on how to derive explicit & concrete information directly in the specification (i.e., not in a long separate document).
- Possible stronger statement: specifications should represent transform to 'other widely adopted specifications'
- Or even FHIR & CDA specifically?
- #2.4 allows extension in future. Look into mechanism for referring to current judgment on 'other widely adopted specifications'
- DAM for ballot
- Looks like a useful approach
- might help to map bits to RIM
- Ask ARB/TSC how this might support policy
Draft DAM Diagrams
|Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items|
© 2012 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.