Open ATS Issues

From HL7Wiki
Revision as of 13:43, 19 September 2007 by Ajulian (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
  • Translations: add "derived from .. ID" attribute ?, much like acknowledgementOf. See also MCCI line-item 157.
  • Message.id "sameness" discussion after transformation by a Gateway.
    • New motion of MnM: 20060113: "At the semantic (or: business process level) the contents of the Transmission wrapper, with the exception of InteractionID, are not relevant when determining if 2 interactions are the same. At the transmission-level 2 Transmissions are the same if they have the same Transmission.id."
    • This has the consequence that the sameness of Transmission.id is not linked to the wider topic of semantic-transmission sameness.
  • Use of the AttentionLine class to add route-tracing information in a Transmission that's being routed/gatewayed to its destination. Are Gateways/Bridges able to add their own information to the Transmission Wrapper in the form of an additional AttentionLine?
    • 20070919 WGM The specific use case calls for an item to consider route-tracing: This is only relevant when an HL7 Application is involved. The opinion of the committee is that the use of the AttentionLine is inappropriate. An explicit means should be derived.

ATS Concepts and Definitions

The items and concepts that are listed below represent some of the major challenges for the ATS document. They are addressed within the Wrappers R2 project plus many Action Items with the InM as well.

Last change: --Miroslav Koncar 06:21, 2 May 2007 (CDT)