Again, the codes are a mishmash and aren't clearly focused on the definition of the element. The codes are supposed to represent a lifcycle stage but most of the codes seem to represent a lifecycle action. These overlap too much with the AuditEvent.type. Their relationship to an entity 'used' in the performance of the event is completely unclear. Again, every code needs a definition that makes clear what the code means, ensures it doesn't overlap with sibling codes and is easily mappable from existing legacy data. Implementers can't be reasonably expected to do this for the current set of codes. Replace this with an example binding to a carefully curated set of example codes.

(Comment 32 - imported by: Ron G. Parker)