Difference between revisions of "Implementation FAQ"
Rene spronk (talk | contribs) |
Rene spronk (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | This | + | There are a considerable number of implementations of HL7 version 3 based on [[Developemnt Edition]]s or [[Normative Edition]]s (e.g. 2005). This document aims to describe the most important lessons learned from these early implementations, as well as some of the frequently aksed questions related to the implementation of HL7 version 3. |
| + | |||
| + | As with all FAQs some of the questions or responses may sound "obvious" to you; this may not necessarily be true for other implementers. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The current question/issue has been organized into a number of categories, mainly in order to limit the size of the individual pages: | ||
| + | *[[Implementation FAQ:Implementer Organization]] | ||
| + | *[[Implementation FAQ:Interface Development]] | ||
| + | *[[Implementation FAQ:Framework Issues]] | ||
| + | *[[Implementation FAQ:Migration from version 2|Migration from version 2]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | The remainder of this page contains a number of new questions/issues that have not been moved to one of the above pages yet. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ---- | ||
| + | |||
== Source and target systems lack rich semantics == | == Source and target systems lack rich semantics == | ||
| Line 33: | Line 46: | ||
*Added conformance profile guide | *Added conformance profile guide | ||
*Added wrapper documentation | *Added wrapper documentation | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
Revision as of 10:49, 26 May 2006
There are a considerable number of implementations of HL7 version 3 based on Developemnt Editions or Normative Editions (e.g. 2005). This document aims to describe the most important lessons learned from these early implementations, as well as some of the frequently aksed questions related to the implementation of HL7 version 3.
As with all FAQs some of the questions or responses may sound "obvious" to you; this may not necessarily be true for other implementers.
The current question/issue has been organized into a number of categories, mainly in order to limit the size of the individual pages:
- Implementation FAQ:Implementer Organization
- Implementation FAQ:Interface Development
- Implementation FAQ:Framework Issues
- Migration from version 2
The remainder of this page contains a number of new questions/issues that have not been moved to one of the above pages yet.
Contents
- 1 Source and target systems lack rich semantics
- 2 cost benefit ratio - startup costs are very high
- 3 version 3 documentation not as easy to use as V2 documents
- 4 information overload
- 5 learning curve
- 6 fill the blanks transforms
- 7 V2 implementation profiles are easy to read
- 8 get some example implementation guides on the wiki
- 9 how to write an implementation guide
Source and target systems lack rich semantics
Black and white TV to HDTV to black and white
cost benefit ratio - startup costs are very high
Have a running system using V2, how do I justify moving to V3, esp as V2 just keeps getting better.
version 3 documentation not as easy to use as V2 documents
In v2.3.1 as a PDF -- one big document and using the find button is a great way to find what you want. This is particularly good as a single document.
- It would seem the implementers need to press Pubs/tooling somewhat harder to get a search option in the standard publication. This has been discussed before as far as I know, but the timing of such a sloution is unclear. Rene spronk 12:46, 21 May 2006 (CDT)
information overload
How much information has to be shared with a trading partner. If the trading partner is V3 knowledgeable is it easier to do.
learning curve
Implementers have to understand the RIM classes and attributes
fill the blanks transforms
V3 startup for implementers can be done by creating “fill the blanks” transforms.
- This is very pragmatic. I'm not aware that this approach is being addressed in any of the implementation oriented Tutorial. It probably needs to be discussed, as quick-and-dirty implementation methods tend to be used more than theoretically flawless implementations... Rene spronk 12:59, 21 May 2006 (CDT)
V2 implementation profiles are easy to read
It is
- What does this mean for v3 implementations? We just have to make sure v3 implementation guides are easy to read. Rene spronk 12:49, 21 May 2006 (CDT)
get some example implementation guides on the wiki
- Good idea, the only ones I have on offer are however in Dutch. The use of a realm-specific language is one of the key features of an implementation guide. Rene spronk 12:57, 21 May 2006 (CDT)
how to write an implementation guide
- Added technical guide
- Added conformance profile guide
- Added wrapper documentation
