The content of this IG wasn't quite ready for ballot. What HL7 process improvement is needed to prevent this in the future?

XMLWordPrintableJSON

    • Type: Change Request
    • Resolution: Not Persuasive
    • Priority: Highest
    • US Da Vinci CDex (FHIR)
    • current
    • Patient Care
    • (many)
    • Hide

      This was a technical issue and not purposely omitted data. 

       extraneous page files in the source folder where published in the table of contents while the actual artifacts are published here:  https://build.fhir.org/ig/HL7/davinci-ecdx/artifacts.html#2

      The HL7 process imporovement question can be lodged with the Da Vinci project team or the appropriate HL7 committee.  However it cannot be answered as part of the ballot reconciliation of this guide.

      Show
      This was a technical issue and not purposely omitted data.   extraneous page files in the source folder where published in the table of contents while the actual artifacts are published here:  https://build.fhir.org/ig/HL7/davinci-ecdx/artifacts.html#2 The HL7 process imporovement question can be lodged with the Da Vinci project team or the appropriate HL7 committee.  However it cannot be answered as part of the ballot reconciliation of this guide.
    • Eric Haas/Jay Lyle: 5-0-8

      There's at least three pages without any content at all, and other pages with partial content. Notably this gem: "Feel free to modify this index page with your own awesome content!" If this was one of my specs, I think that TSC would've (appropriately) held up the ballot. How did this get published for ballot in this state? What HL7 process improvement is needed to prevent this in the future?

      (Comment 27 - imported by: Jean Duteau)

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

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: