Provenance without activity isn't very useful

XMLWordPrintableJSON

    • Type: Change Request
    • Resolution: Persuasive with Modification
    • Priority: Medium
    • US Core (FHIR)
    • 3.1.1
    • Cross-Group Projects
    • US Core Provenance Profile
    • Hide

      The issue of activity did not come up during Argonaut design/development of this profile.

       

      Insert a new end to the sentence following the sentence that ends with "lineage of information": "specifically, what organization was responsible for the most recent action on the resource."

      Add to profile-specific implementation guidance:

      Systems that need to know the activity has occurred SHOULD populate the activity.

      Show
      The issue of activity did not come up during Argonaut design/development of this profile.   Insert a new end to the sentence following the sentence that ends with "lineage of information": "specifically, what organization was responsible for the most recent action on the resource." Add to profile-specific implementation guidance: Systems that need to know the activity has occurred SHOULD populate the activity.
    • Brett Marquard/Lloyd McKenzie:12-0-0
    • Clarification
    • Non-substantive

      If all you have is a date, target and who - all you know is "someone did something to this record on this date" - you don't know if it was created, updated, anonymized, deleted, archived or something else.  At minimum, activity should be mustSupport, and I'd lean towards mandatory (though constraining to a 'sane' value set would be useful.

       

            Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            Lloyd McKenzie
            Lloyd McKenzie
            Watchers:
            3 Start watching this issue

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: