I think that you should prefer rest-hooks, but leave the door open for websockets. - PAS #134

XMLWordPrintableJSON

    • Type: Change Request
    • Resolution: Persuasive
    • Priority: Medium
    • US Da Vinci PAS (FHIR)
    • STU3
    • Financial Mgmt
    • (profiles) [deprecated]
    • Hide

      Will indicated that implementers SHOULD support REST-hooks and MAY support websockets.  Will also remove the question

      Show
      Will indicated that implementers SHOULD support REST-hooks and MAY support websockets.  Will also remove the question
    • Laurie Burckhardt/Mark Scrimshire: 31-0-0
    • Clarification
    • Non-substantive

      Existing Wording: The project is seeking feedback on whether the implementation guide should mandate one of the subscription channel approaches (either rest-hook or websocket). Feedback for or against standardization as well as an expression of preference is welcome.

      Comment:

      I think that you should prefer rest-hooks, but leave the door open for websockets. Given the number of likely intermediaries, and the typicl problems associated with proxying websockets it's unclear that websockets would really be successful in an enterprise, production environment. Of course, production implementation experience would better inform this decision.

      Summary:

      I think that you should prefer rest-hooks, but leave the door open for websockets.

            Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            Isaac Vetter
            Watchers:
            4 Start watching this issue

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: