Difference between revisions of "Conformance SIG"
Rene spronk (talk | contribs) (new section related to proposal 908) |
Frankoemig (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
During the Phoenix (January 2006) WGM the Conformance SIG (and MnM/INM) had a look at the proposed Feature Discovery Interactiona s described in the | During the Phoenix (January 2006) WGM the Conformance SIG (and MnM/INM) had a look at the proposed Feature Discovery Interactiona s described in the | ||
[http://www.hl7.org/Library/Committees/cq/20040827%5FHL7%5Fprop%5F908%2Edoc Ping and Feature Discovery proposal document]. The Conformance SIG expressed it would be useful to have such an interaction, and approved a motion to work with INM to progress the proposal in San Antonio. It was however unclear if a new HL7 interaction should be developed, or whether we should re-use an existing industry standard. | [http://www.hl7.org/Library/Committees/cq/20040827%5FHL7%5Fprop%5F908%2Edoc Ping and Feature Discovery proposal document]. The Conformance SIG expressed it would be useful to have such an interaction, and approved a motion to work with INM to progress the proposal in San Antonio. It was however unclear if a new HL7 interaction should be developed, or whether we should re-use an existing industry standard. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Discussion == | ||
| + | |||
| + | Another issue comes up with the definiton of what "mandatory" and "required" means. Mandatory means the a value must be present and a null-value is not allowed. Unfortunately, that is the same as what required means in v2. Due to the fact that we do have the same issues in v2 as well as in V3 we should find a way to use the same terminology. | ||
Revision as of 10:25, 23 February 2006
The Conformance Special Interest Group is working on creating conformance criteria for HL7 2.x and V3.
Here we should add documentation and FAQs.
One of the key HL7 v3 conformance artefacts is the Application Role, a core element of a Conformance Claim.
During the Phoenix (January 2006) WGM the Conformance SIG (and MnM/INM) had a look at the proposed Feature Discovery Interactiona s described in the Ping and Feature Discovery proposal document. The Conformance SIG expressed it would be useful to have such an interaction, and approved a motion to work with INM to progress the proposal in San Antonio. It was however unclear if a new HL7 interaction should be developed, or whether we should re-use an existing industry standard.
Discussion
Another issue comes up with the definiton of what "mandatory" and "required" means. Mandatory means the a value must be present and a null-value is not allowed. Unfortunately, that is the same as what required means in v2. Due to the fact that we do have the same issues in v2 as well as in V3 we should find a way to use the same terminology.
