This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "Talk:Proposal 926: Encounter Query"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Rene spronk (talk | contribs) |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Encounter Query Discussion | Encounter Query Discussion | ||
| − | At the WGM it stated that the fulfiller could reject the query, for example, when the requester was not authorized to see the data. This would be a different interaction than the query response. Need to define an additional interaction. | + | At the WGM it stated that the fulfiller could reject the query, for example, when the requester was not authorized to see the data. This would be a different interaction than the query response. Need to define an additional interaction. [Gregg] I see that Proposal 884 now includes an interaction to reject the query so I must be confused. Anyway, is there a use case for adding this interaction to this proposal? [Gregg] |
| + | *(Rene) Proposal 884 (the other one) doesn't contain a query, it's an order. | ||
| + | *(Rene) The rejection of a query can be done using the very same interaction as the response. The response will have 0 payloads, and the reason for those 0 payloads will be identified in both the QueryAck as well as the DetectedIssue classes min the controlAct wrapper. | ||
| − | Here is a draft Encounter RMIM for discussion | + | Here is a draft Encounter RMIM for discussion. It probably still has associations and attributes that are not relevant. [Gregg] |
| + | *(Rene) I discussed the use-case with some Dutch colleagues earlier today, as stated during the WGM a list of required data elements will be added to this Wiki, which will serve as input into PA's effort in creating a response model. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | [[Image:PRPA_RM400001.GIF]] | ||
Latest revision as of 17:22, 26 January 2007
Encounter Query Discussion
At the WGM it stated that the fulfiller could reject the query, for example, when the requester was not authorized to see the data. This would be a different interaction than the query response. Need to define an additional interaction. [Gregg] I see that Proposal 884 now includes an interaction to reject the query so I must be confused. Anyway, is there a use case for adding this interaction to this proposal? [Gregg]
- (Rene) Proposal 884 (the other one) doesn't contain a query, it's an order.
- (Rene) The rejection of a query can be done using the very same interaction as the response. The response will have 0 payloads, and the reason for those 0 payloads will be identified in both the QueryAck as well as the DetectedIssue classes min the controlAct wrapper.
Here is a draft Encounter RMIM for discussion. It probably still has associations and attributes that are not relevant. [Gregg]
- (Rene) I discussed the use-case with some Dutch colleagues earlier today, as stated during the WGM a list of required data elements will be added to this Wiki, which will serve as input into PA's effort in creating a response model.
