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

Difference between revisions of "CDA R3 avoid xsi:type"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{CDA R3 Open Proposals}}
+
{{CDA R3 Closed Proposals}}
  
 
Return to [[Structured Documents TC|SDTC]] page; Return to [[:category:CDA R3 Formal Proposals|CDA R3 Formal Proposals]] page.
 
Return to [[Structured Documents TC|SDTC]] page; Return to [[:category:CDA R3 Formal Proposals|CDA R3 Formal Proposals]] page.
Line 28: Line 28:
  
 
Creating named clones for each datatype allowed in CDA would limit our dependence on the XML Schema language, and also improve tool compatibility.  
 
Creating named clones for each datatype allowed in CDA would limit our dependence on the XML Schema language, and also improve tool compatibility.  
 +
 +
For example, In the following observation:
 +
 +
    <observation classCode="OBS" moodCode="EVN">
 +
        <code code="50373000" codeSystem="2.16.840.1.113883.6.96"
 +
            codeSystemName="SNOMED CT" displayName="Body height measure"/>
 +
        <statusCode code="completed"/>
 +
        <effectiveTime value="200004071430"/>
 +
        <value xsi:type="PQ" value="1.77" unit="m"/>
 +
    </observation>
 +
 +
you could replace
 +
 +
    <value xsi:type="PQ" value="1.77" unit="m"/>
 +
 +
with
 +
 +
    <physicalQuantity value="1.77" unit="m"/>
  
 
For more reasons why the use of xsi:type is often frowned upon, refer to Norm's blog entry on the subject: http://norman.walsh.name/2004/01/29/trainwreck.
 
For more reasons why the use of xsi:type is often frowned upon, refer to Norm's blog entry on the subject: http://norman.walsh.name/2004/01/29/trainwreck.
 
  
 
== Discussion ==
 
== Discussion ==
Line 39: Line 56:
  
 
== Resolution ==
 
== Resolution ==
(Resolution is to be recorded here and in the referenced minutes, which are the authoritative source of resolution).
+
March 23, 2010: This is an ITS and data types issue. Opposed: 0; Abstain: 0; In favor: 6.

Latest revision as of 20:50, 23 March 2010


Return to SDTC page; Return to CDA R3 Formal Proposals page.

See CDA R3 Formal Proposals for instructions on using this form. Failure to adhere to these instructions may result in delays. Editing of formal proposals is restricted to the submitter and SDTC co-chairs. Other changes will be undone. Comments can be captured in the associated discussion page.


(An announcement of this proposal must be submitted to the Structured Documents list to be formally submitted.)


Submitted by: Rick Geimer Revision date: August 31, 2009
Submitted date: August 31, 2009 Change request ID: <<Change Request ID>>

Issue

Requiring the use of the xsi:type attribute is problematic. First, it binds CDA to the XML Schema language (other schema languages, like RelaxNG, do not support xsi:type), and also many XML tools to not support this XML Schema specific attribute.

Recommendation

  • Create clones of the <value/> element (inside an observation) that are pre-bound to specific datatypes, i.e. <physicalQuantity/> would be pre-defined as a PQ.

Rationale

Creating named clones for each datatype allowed in CDA would limit our dependence on the XML Schema language, and also improve tool compatibility.

For example, In the following observation:

    <observation classCode="OBS" moodCode="EVN">
        
        <statusCode code="completed"/>
        <effectiveTime value="200004071430"/>
        <value xsi:type="PQ" value="1.77" unit="m"/>
    </observation>

you could replace

    <value xsi:type="PQ" value="1.77" unit="m"/>

with

    <physicalQuantity value="1.77" unit="m"/>

For more reasons why the use of xsi:type is often frowned upon, refer to Norm's blog entry on the subject: http://norman.walsh.name/2004/01/29/trainwreck.

Discussion

Recommended Action Items

Resolution

March 23, 2010: This is an ITS and data types issue. Opposed: 0; Abstain: 0; In favor: 6.