This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here

Difference between revisions of "Datatypes R2 Issue 51"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
Line 3: Line 3:
 
== Introduction ==
 
== Introduction ==
  
 +
Dan Russler asks for an extension of CO where you could actually
 +
have a numeric value as in
  
? backward compatible.
+
<value xsi:type="CO" value="2" code="xyz" codeSystem="..." displayName="eye opening to pain"/>
 +
 
 +
and then also he wants translations, so CO would have to extend
 +
CE rather than CV.
 +
 
 +
We'd also have to add an operation
 +
INT plus(CO)
 +
to the abstract definition of CO.
 +
 
 +
Backwards compatibility: this would be backwards compatible
  
 
== Discussion ==
 
== Discussion ==
  
 +
'''Grahame''': This is counter to the whole point of designing CO the way it has been designed. It was deliberately designed this way to avoid the trap of explicitly representing the order in a non-manageable fashion, and delgating the order to the CTS -> invite Dan to contribute.
  
 
== Links ==
 
== Links ==
 
Back to [[Data Types R2 issues]]
 
Back to [[Data Types R2 issues]]

Revision as of 23:14, 16 May 2006

Data Types Issue 51: CO numeric value

Introduction

Dan Russler asks for an extension of CO where you could actually have a numeric value as in

<value xsi:type="CO" value="2" code="xyz" codeSystem="..." displayName="eye opening to pain"/>

and then also he wants translations, so CO would have to extend CE rather than CV.

We'd also have to add an operation

INT plus(CO)

to the abstract definition of CO.

Backwards compatibility: this would be backwards compatible

Discussion

Grahame: This is counter to the whole point of designing CO the way it has been designed. It was deliberately designed this way to avoid the trap of explicitly representing the order in a non-manageable fashion, and delgating the order to the CTS -> invite Dan to contribute.

Links

Back to Data Types R2 issues