Artifacts shouldn't be differentiated by number

XMLWordPrintableJSON

    • Type: Change Request
    • Resolution: Not Persuasive with Modification
    • Priority: Highest
    • US SDOH Clinical Care (FHIR)
    • 0.1.0 [deprecated]
    • Patient Care
    • Artifacts Index
    • Hide

      Will keep the SDOHCC designation to clearly identify these profiles, however we will remove the number at the end and if there are two profiles on the same resource, they will be identified by naming them based on their intended use.

      Will keep the numbering on the examples to correspond to the questions in the Hunger Vital Signs.

       

      Show
      Will keep the SDOHCC designation to clearly identify these profiles, however we will remove the number at the end and if there are two profiles on the same resource, they will be identified by naming them based on their intended use. Will keep the numbering on the examples to correspond to the questions in the Hunger Vital Signs.  
    • Bob Dieterle / Laura Heerman-Langford : 8-0-3
    • Correction
    • Non-compatible

      Every artifact should have a meaningful name. Those names don't need to be prefixed with SDOHCC and do need to explain what the artifact is for. If you've got 3 different hunger vital sign examples, the names should reflect what makes each unique. When there's only one profile for a given resource type, there's certainly no need to stick a number on the end.

      (Comment 112 - imported by: Robert Dieterle)

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

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: