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

Difference between revisions of "CSCR-111 Product relationship to Supply Act should be non mandatory in CS"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "Back to Clinical Statement Change Requests page. {|width=100% cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2 border=1 || '''Submitted by:''' Rik Smithies || '''Revision date:''' <<Revision Date...")
 
Line 5: Line 5:
 
|-
 
|-
 
|| '''Submitted date:''' 11-Sep-12
 
|| '''Submitted date:''' 11-Sep-12
|| '''Change request ID:''' CSCR-107
+
|| '''Change request ID:''' CSCR-111
 
|-
 
|-
 
|}
 
|}
Line 11: Line 11:
 
== Issue ==
 
== Issue ==
 
From Rx alignment sheet (posted to list 27th July)
 
From Rx alignment sheet (posted to list 27th July)
 +
 +
Product relationship to Supply Act should be relaxed in CS.  It is currently mandatory in CS, but not in RX.
 +
 +
It is mandatory in CS since supply has to supply something. But product can also be on the organizer instead.
 +
Seems ok to relax to optional 0..*, with note to say need a product somewhere in the associated classes.
  
  

Revision as of 17:28, 13 September 2012

Back to Clinical Statement Change Requests page.

Submitted by: Rik Smithies Revision date: <<Revision Date>>
Submitted date: 11-Sep-12 Change request ID: CSCR-111

Issue

From Rx alignment sheet (posted to list 27th July)

Product relationship to Supply Act should be relaxed in CS. It is currently mandatory in CS, but not in RX.

It is mandatory in CS since supply has to supply something. But product can also be on the organizer instead. Seems ok to relax to optional 0..*, with note to say need a product somewhere in the associated classes.


Recommendation

  • todo

Rationale

Discussion

Recommended Action Items

Resolution

Against: 0; Abstain: 0; In Favor: 0