identifier is 0..1. Are there no use cases for systems with mulitple identifers? Perhaps a OID and a (future) registry-assigned UUID? Or an HL7 OID and a CDC OID? - 2018-May Core Norm Conformance #53

XMLWordPrintableJSON

    • Type: Change Request
    • Resolution: Persuasive
    • Priority: Medium
    • FHIR Core (FHIR)
    • STU3
    • Terminology Infrastructure
    • CodeSystem
    • Hide

      Will change the cardinality of 'identifier' to 0..* as suggested.

      For example, note that HL7 defines at least these three for many of it's code systems: FHIR canonical URI, and OID and a V2 Table 0396 mnemonic.

      Show
      Will change the cardinality of 'identifier' to 0..* as suggested. For example, note that HL7 defines at least these three for many of it's code systems: FHIR canonical URI, and OID and a V2 Table 0396 mnemonic.
    • Grahame Grieve / Peter Jordan: 6-0-0
    • Compatible, substantive
    • STU3

      Existing Wording: identifier 0..1

      Comment:

      identifier is 0..1. Are there no use cases for systems with mulitple identifers? Perhaps a OID and a (future) registry-assigned UUID? Or an HL7 OID and a CDC OID?

      Summary:

      identifier is 0..1. Are there no use cases for systems with mulitple identifers? Perhaps a OID and a (future) registry-assigned UUID? Or an HL7 OID and a CDC OID?

            Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            Jay Lyle
            Jay Lyle
            Watchers:
            3 Start watching this issue

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: