This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here

Difference between revisions of "Datatypes R2 Issue 12"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 23: Line 23:
 
revising this, but a sweeping change without further looking
 
revising this, but a sweeping change without further looking
 
at the specific cases is a very bad idea. --[[User:Gschadow|Gschadow]] 01:23, 25 Jun 2006 (CDT)
 
at the specific cases is a very bad idea. --[[User:Gschadow|Gschadow]] 01:23, 25 Jun 2006 (CDT)
 +
 +
BOF: Accept and add equivalence definitions for EN, AD, PQ, CD, possibly others
 +
 +
== Disposition ==
 +
 +
== Status ==
 +
 +
Proposed
  
 
== Links ==
 
== Links ==
 
Back to [[Data Types R2 issues]]
 
Back to [[Data Types R2 issues]]

Revision as of 03:44, 12 January 2007

Data Types Issue 12: Drop identity-equality distinction

Introduction

Remove the artificial distinction between identity and equality. We do a whole lot of goofy things (like make addresses BAGs instead of SETs because we need to support duplicate addresses with different times.

This would not be backward compatible.

Discussion

DataTypes BOF May 2005: Proposed action: Accept and add equivalence definitions for EN, AD, PQ, CD, possibly others

This is a very far-reaching thing to do. I can agree to EN and AD but it should not be done for PQ and CD. The proposal is not correctly titled, as the whole point about data types is that identity is not different from equality. Anything that looks different between two values and does not factor into the equality relation is logically irrelevant. I am O.K. with revising this, but a sweeping change without further looking at the specific cases is a very bad idea. --Gschadow 01:23, 25 Jun 2006 (CDT)

BOF: Accept and add equivalence definitions for EN, AD, PQ, CD, possibly others

Disposition

Status

Proposed

Links

Back to Data Types R2 issues