Clarification or simplification is needed 4

XMLWordPrintableJSON

    • Type: Change Request
    • Resolution: Persuasive
    • Priority: Medium
    • Shorthand (FHIR)
    • 0.12.0 [deprecated]
    • FHIR Infrastructure
    • Language Reference
    • 1.4
    • Hide

      This is a good observation and suggestion. The review is right, that the comment about display name is too detailed and opens too many issues for a code walkthrough that is supposed to be at a high level. Suggestion (A) is to remove the comment is the best course of action.

      Show
      This is a good observation and suggestion. The review is right, that the comment about display name is too detailed and opens too many issues for a code walkthrough that is supposed to be at a high level. Suggestion (A) is to remove the comment is the best course of action.
    • Moesel/Rhodes 11-0-1
    • Clarification
    • Non-substantive

      This comment sounds like a design flaw and raises some questions:
      1. Shall this then become a common practice to place the display name inside the comments?
      2. When should the display name be used?
      3. How common known this issue is and if there are any references to forther read about this issue.

      So I suggest one of the following:
      A) Remove the commented out display name in the example and remove this comment. As this is not that very important for this walkthrough
      B) If you think this important then please reference or present the more complete issue analysis and the guidelines for when the display value is to be used or not.

      Existing Wording:

      Note that the display name is presented in a comment, since setting the display name would require all instances to send the display name exact as specified.

            Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            ivan_zapreev
            Watchers:
            1 Start watching this issue

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: