Clarify Attachment.language value set. - 2018-May Core Norm Infrastructure #53

XMLWordPrintableJSON

    • Type: Change Request
    • Resolution: Persuasive with Modification
    • Priority: Medium
    • FHIR Core (FHIR)
    • STU3
    • FHIR Infrastructure
    • Datatypes
    • 2.23.2.2
    • Hide

      fix broken link. Implementers have indicated that an enumerable list of common languages is a useful construct, and the value set has lots of uses outside specific systems choosing which languages they support

      Show
      fix broken link. Implementers have indicated that an enumerable list of common languages is a useful construct, and the value set has lots of uses outside specific systems choosing which languages they support
    • Grahame Grieve/Rick Geimer: 9-0-0
    • Non-substantive
    • STU3

      Existing Wording: Terminology Binding Common Languages (Extensible but limited to ??)

      Comment:

      Resolve "??" in Attachment.language. There should be no "todos" in normative content. (2.23.0.3 shows "all languages")

      What is the advantage of binding to the "Common Languages" set, instead of the the "all language" set? A system is going to choose what languages it is going to support anyhow, so there isn't really a benefit to the Common Language value set.

      Summary:

      Clarify Attachment.language value set.

            Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            Elliot Silver
            Watchers:
            2 Start watching this issue

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: