This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here

Difference between revisions of "Use of UUIDs in II.extension"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(19 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
{{MnM Resolved Hot Topic}}
 +
{{INM Workitem}}
 +
==Issues==
 
There are two views about whether it is appropriate to send a UUID (GUID) in the II.extension property:
 
There are two views about whether it is appropriate to send a UUID (GUID) in the II.extension property:
  
Line 5: Line 8:
 
2. It's not terribly appropriate and meaningless.  The II.root is not intended to convey semantics, merely ensure uniqueness.  UUIDs are already globally unique, so having a separate root is just extra overhead.  All semantics are conveyed by other RIM attributes (e.g. Role.classCode, Role.code, Role.scoper, Act.classCode, Act.code, Act.moodCode
 
2. It's not terribly appropriate and meaningless.  The II.root is not intended to convey semantics, merely ensure uniqueness.  UUIDs are already globally unique, so having a separate root is just extra overhead.  All semantics are conveyed by other RIM attributes (e.g. Role.classCode, Role.code, Role.scoper, Act.classCode, Act.code, Act.moodCode
  
So: which is it?
+
So: which is it? (see the discussion page for details)
  
:Most implementations use root to identify the ID-scheme, and extension as an ID that exists within (i.e. has been created according to) that ID-scheme. The ID Scheme uses/produces values for the extension attribute, the structure and layout are determined by the ID scheme. If it so happens that in itself it is a UUID then this doesn't change the generic mechanism. The identification of the ID scheme is NOT carried elsewhere in the RIM. A Role.scoper merely uses a particular identification, whetever that ID scheme may be. [[User:Rene spronk|Rene spronk]] 03:14, 2 Jun 2006 (CDT)
+
==Resolution==
 
+
20070108 MnM/INM: Motion to add ''"The normal mechanism for transmitting a UUID (DCE Universal Unique Identifier) as an identifier is to send it as the root with no extension. A UUID expressed as an extension is not considered to be a match for a UUID in the root. I.e. A match is required on both root and extension to be considered a match. The root can be used to identify a namespace. The design of HL7 specifications SHALL never assume that receiving applications can infer the identity of the scoper or issuer, or the type of the identifier from the namespace identifier."'' to datatypes R2. (Grahame/ Lee, x-0-1)
==Discussion==
 
MnM Conference call 20060630
 
 
 
*This is really a question of whether II.root is to be used for semantics. If that question is answered, the answers to the above fall out
 
*Additional discussion required on wiki related to this issue
 
 
 
{{Hot Topic}}
 

Latest revision as of 15:52, 19 January 2007

Issues

There are two views about whether it is appropriate to send a UUID (GUID) in the II.extension property:

1. It's perfectly ok. The II.root represents the assigning authority which provides semantic context for the UUID issued.

2. It's not terribly appropriate and meaningless. The II.root is not intended to convey semantics, merely ensure uniqueness. UUIDs are already globally unique, so having a separate root is just extra overhead. All semantics are conveyed by other RIM attributes (e.g. Role.classCode, Role.code, Role.scoper, Act.classCode, Act.code, Act.moodCode

So: which is it? (see the discussion page for details)

Resolution

20070108 MnM/INM: Motion to add "The normal mechanism for transmitting a UUID (DCE Universal Unique Identifier) as an identifier is to send it as the root with no extension. A UUID expressed as an extension is not considered to be a match for a UUID in the root. I.e. A match is required on both root and extension to be considered a match. The root can be used to identify a namespace. The design of HL7 specifications SHALL never assume that receiving applications can infer the identity of the scoper or issuer, or the type of the identifier from the namespace identifier." to datatypes R2. (Grahame/ Lee, x-0-1)