Why no required Pracitioner properties? - 2016-09 core #355

XMLWordPrintableJSON

    • Type: Change Request
    • Resolution: Considered - Question answered
    • Priority: Medium
    • FHIR Core (FHIR)
    • DSTU2
    • Patient Administration
    • Practitioner
    • Hide

      Resources are designed to be useable in a variety of contexts. Because there are use-cases where a name might not be known or might not be shareable, it is optional. There are similar use-cases for other elements. All instances must have at least one element present, but it would be up to the implementation context to determine which element(s) were appropriate/necessary. Such requirements could be enforced with a profile.

      Show
      Resources are designed to be useable in a variety of contexts. Because there are use-cases where a name might not be known or might not be shareable, it is optional. There are similar use-cases for other elements. All instances must have at least one element present, but it would be up to the implementation context to determine which element(s) were appropriate/necessary. Such requirements could be enforced with a profile.
    • Brian Postlethwaite/Iryna Roy: 10-0-0
    • Clarification

      Comment:

      None of the properties of Practitoner in the resource is required

      For a Practitioner to be identifiable, shouldn't at least the name be required?

      Summary:

      Why no required Pracitioner properties?

            Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            Stephen Chu
            Watchers:
            2 Start watching this issue

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: