This IG can't make a policy position or interpretation of the law into a HL7 Conformance Statement. Please refrain from mixing implementation conformance with IG specific policy stances for the following reasons:
*This is not part of HL7 Conformance methodology, because it is not testable given the standards included in this IG. Testable, computable ability for system components implementing HRex to meet the DaVinci Guiding Principles is deemed outside the scope of this IG. If this IG were to make a testable computable conformance statement to this effect, it would need to include standards that support these capabilities.
*If this policy stance were adopted as a conformance statement, it has the potential to influence how developers implement this IG at the peril of their legal departments, and might run afoul of the policy positions of other HL7 community member and HL7 leadership, which would likely prefer that implementable HL7 standards' conformance statements remain policy agnostic.
Instead, this IG should strongly encourage implementers to consult with their legal counsel about whether their implementations should adhere to the DaVinci community's Guiding Principles. Benefits for adhering to these principles is to lessen the need to bidirectionally negotiate with trading partners about the tenets, e.g., which purposes of use must be asserted in order for a payer to share DaVinci IG information with another payer.

Existing Wording:

All IGs and implementations SHOULD follow the current Da Vinci Guiding Principles.

Proposed Wording:

All implementers of any Da Vinci FHIR Implementation Guides (IG) are strongly encouraged to consult with their legal counsel about whether their implementations should follow the current Da Vinci Guiding Principles.