This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
<meta name="googlebot" content="noindex">

Difference between revisions of "Update RIM description of ExecutionAndDeliveryTime"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(New page: Editing of harmonization proposals prior to a harmonization meeting is restricted to the proposal submitter and the co-chairs of the steward comittee. Other changes will be undone. Please ...)
 
Line 28: Line 28:
 
|bgcolor="#aaaaff" align=center| '''AFFECTED ENTITIES OF INTEREST TO TC''' <br/> (responsibility level: S=Steward; I=Interested)
 
|bgcolor="#aaaaff" align=center| '''AFFECTED ENTITIES OF INTEREST TO TC''' <br/> (responsibility level: S=Steward; I=Interested)
 
|-
 
|-
|| ''Comittee1''
+
|| ''InM - Infrastructure and Messaging''
|| ''Unknown/Reviewed/Approved''
+
|| ''Approved'' (See [[Extend usage of ExecutionAndDeliveryTime]])
|| ''S or I''
+
|| ''S''
|-
 
|-
 
|| ''Comittee2''
 
|| ''Unknown/Reviewed/Approved''
 
|| ''S or I''
 
 
|-
 
|-
 
|}
 
|}
  
 
== Issue ==
 
== Issue ==
''One paragraph summary of the issue and the solution as detailed in this proposal.''
+
Redefine (in a backwards compatibe fashion) the description of the QueryByParameter.executionAndDeliveryTime attribute in the RIM.
 +
 
 +
The current definition doesn't specify how the attribute should be interpreted in the case of a Deferred or Immediate query. HL7 version 2 contains a definition for its interpretation within Deferred queries; this proposal seeks to add a definition of its interpration in Immediate queries.
 +
 
 +
For ''Immediate queries'' executionAndDeliveryTime should be interpreted as the point in time '''before''' which the responding system should have send a response. This to avoid waiting for an undefined period of length by a system that has just sent a query. The responding system may elect to send a query-response with zero results in it, forcing the querying system to send a 'query continuation interaction' to get hold of a next part of the result set.
  
 
== Recommendation(s) ==
 
== Recommendation(s) ==
''If the proposal requests RIM structure as well as vocabulary changes then please document them in separate sections. The proposal should be as atomic as possible. It's better to have 5 individual proposals then 1 proposal that attempts to group them.''
+
Change the defintion of the executionAndDeliveryTime as shown below:
  
 +
=== RIM Recommendation(s) ===
 +
Change the current definition of executionAndDeliveryTime from
  
=== RIM Recommendation(s) ===
+
3.6.10.7 QuerySpec.executionAndDeliveryTime:: TS (0..1)
 +
Definition:Specifies the time the response is to be returned.
 +
 
 +
to
 +
 
 +
3.6.10.7 QuerySpec.executionAndDeliveryTime:: TS (0..1)
 +
Definition: Specifies the time the response is to be returned. If the query priority is Deferred, then
 +
executionAndDeliveryTime should be interpreted as the point in time when the response should be sent.
 +
If the query priority is Immediate executionAndDeliveryTime should be interpreted as the
 +
point in time '''before''' which the responding system should have send a response.
 +
 
 +
The proposed change is backwards compatible.
 +
 
 +
The semantics of the above  description for Deferred queries is based on the corresponding v2 field:
  
 +
Definition of RCP-4:
 +
5.5.6.4    RCP-4  Execution and Delivery Time  (DTM)  01441
 +
Definition:  Specifies the time the response is to be returned.  This
 +
field is only valued when RCP-1-Query priority contains the value D
 +
(Deferred).
  
 
=== Vocabulary Recommendation(s) ===
 
=== Vocabulary Recommendation(s) ===
''Please use the fully specified names when inserting/adding/changing vocabularies, including full parentage of the vocabulary.''
+
*Not applicable.
  
 
== Rationale ==
 
== Rationale ==
''Any additional information needed to understand, evaluate or implement the recommendation, such as model fragments or other context that demonstrates use of the requested change. Include implications.''
+
*The specification of a 'timeout' fits within the current description of the semantics of this attribute. The alternative would be to create a new attribute - this isn't seen as a necessity given the semantic match.  
 
+
*A similar proposal has been approved for HL7 version 2. The definition of RCP-4 will be changed for those cases where
  
 
== Recommended Action Items ==
 
== Recommended Action Items ==
Line 66: Line 85:
 
== Resolution ==
 
== Resolution ==
  
 
 
''NOTE: This template puts this proposal in the'' [[:Category:Harmonization Proposal|
 
"Harmonization Proposal"]] ''Wiki Category. Once the proposal has been discussed and the resolution has been aded, please update the Category statement to put the proposal in the'' [[:Category:Discussed Harmonization Proposal|
 
"Discussed Harmonization Proposal"]]. ''The "Harmonization Proposal" Wiki Category is for OPEN non-discussed proposals only.''
 
  
 
[[Category:Harmonization Proposal]]
 
[[Category:Harmonization Proposal]]

Revision as of 13:53, 21 December 2008

Editing of harmonization proposals prior to a harmonization meeting is restricted to the proposal submitter and the co-chairs of the steward comittee. Other changes will be undone. Please add comments to the "discussion" page associated with this proposal.

Recommendation for HL7 RIM Change RECOMMENDATION ID:
Sponsored by: InM - Infrastructure and Messaging Approval date by committee: to be approved
Revision (# and date): n.a. - see Wiki history page Date submitted:
Editor/Author: René Spronk  
PROPOSALNAME: Update RIM description of ExecutionAndDeliveryTime  

Stewards Position

REQUIRED - This table should contain one row for each Steward Committee affected by the recommendation.

TC RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL STATUS AFFECTED ENTITIES OF INTEREST TO TC
(responsibility level: S=Steward; I=Interested)
InM - Infrastructure and Messaging Approved (See Extend usage of ExecutionAndDeliveryTime) S

Issue

Redefine (in a backwards compatibe fashion) the description of the QueryByParameter.executionAndDeliveryTime attribute in the RIM.

The current definition doesn't specify how the attribute should be interpreted in the case of a Deferred or Immediate query. HL7 version 2 contains a definition for its interpretation within Deferred queries; this proposal seeks to add a definition of its interpration in Immediate queries.

For Immediate queries executionAndDeliveryTime should be interpreted as the point in time before which the responding system should have send a response. This to avoid waiting for an undefined period of length by a system that has just sent a query. The responding system may elect to send a query-response with zero results in it, forcing the querying system to send a 'query continuation interaction' to get hold of a next part of the result set.

Recommendation(s)

Change the defintion of the executionAndDeliveryTime as shown below:

RIM Recommendation(s)

Change the current definition of executionAndDeliveryTime from

3.6.10.7 QuerySpec.executionAndDeliveryTime:: TS (0..1)
Definition:Specifies the time the response is to be returned.

to

3.6.10.7 QuerySpec.executionAndDeliveryTime:: TS (0..1)
Definition: Specifies the time the response is to be returned. If the query priority is Deferred, then
executionAndDeliveryTime should be interpreted as the point in time when the response should be sent.
If the query priority is Immediate executionAndDeliveryTime should be interpreted as the 
point in time before which the responding system should have send a response. 

The proposed change is backwards compatible.

The semantics of the above description for Deferred queries is based on the corresponding v2 field:

Definition of RCP-4:

5.5.6.4    RCP-4   Execution and Delivery Time   (DTM)   01441
Definition:  Specifies the time the response is to be returned.  This
field is only valued when RCP-1-Query priority contains the value D
(Deferred).

Vocabulary Recommendation(s)

  • Not applicable.

Rationale

  • The specification of a 'timeout' fits within the current description of the semantics of this attribute. The alternative would be to create a new attribute - this isn't seen as a necessity given the semantic match.
  • A similar proposal has been approved for HL7 version 2. The definition of RCP-4 will be changed for those cases where

Recommended Action Items

  • Implement the proposed solution


Discussion

Resolution