This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here

Difference between revisions of "Conformance SIG"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(23 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
#REDIRECT [[Implementation and Conformance TC]]
 +
 +
 +
''Note: during the May2007 WGM the [[Implementation Committee]] and the [[Conformance SIG]] will jointly petition the TSC to become a new TC. See draft [[ImpConf Mission and Charter]].''
 +
 +
This is the main page of the Conformance SIG.
 +
 
The Conformance Special Interest Group is working on creating conformance criteria for HL7 2.x and V3.  
 
The Conformance Special Interest Group is working on creating conformance criteria for HL7 2.x and V3.  
  
Here we should add documentation and FAQs.
+
The following collaborative documents are edited by the Conformance co-chairs:
 +
*[[ICTC Sept 2007 WGM agenda]] Atlanta
 +
* [[Conformance San Antonio Agenda]]
 +
** [[Notes from Implementation Committee and Conformance Jan2007|Notes from joint meeting with Implementation TC]]
 +
* [[Conformance Tel.Conf.]]
 +
* [[Conformance Tel.Conf. Minutes]]
  
One of the key HL7 v3 conformance artefacts is the [[Application Role]], a core element of a [[Conformance Claim]].
+
These documents are open documents for editing by any interested party:
 +
* [[Conformance User Guide]]
 +
* [[Conformance Implementation Manual]]
 +
* [[Conformance Discussion]]
 +
* [[Conformance Datatype Specialization Constraints]]
 +
* [[Conformance FAQ]]
 +
* [[Conformance Glossary]]
 +
* [[Conformance Statement]]
 +
* [[Eclipse OHF Conformance Questions]]
 +
* [[Constraint Language]]
 +
* [[CWE]]
  
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
+
NICTIZ have created an implementation oriented discussion document related to conformance and artefact versioning:
[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.
+
* [[Interaction Conformance and Versioning - Implementation Issues]]
  
== 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.
+
{{SIG Category}}

Latest revision as of 15:11, 24 August 2007

Note: during the May2007 WGM the Implementation Committee and the Conformance SIG will jointly petition the TSC to become a new TC. See draft ImpConf Mission and Charter.

This is the main page of the Conformance SIG.

The Conformance Special Interest Group is working on creating conformance criteria for HL7 2.x and V3.

The following collaborative documents are edited by the Conformance co-chairs:

These documents are open documents for editing by any interested party:

NICTIZ have created an implementation oriented discussion document related to conformance and artefact versioning: