Events don't look like their conformance definition

XMLWordPrintableJSON

    • Type: Change Request
    • Resolution: Persuasive with Modification
    • Priority: Medium
    • FHIR Core (FHIR)
    • DSTU1 [deprecated]
    • FHIR Infrastructure
    • STU
    • CapabilityStatement (Conformance)
      MessageHeader
    • Hide

      Will add the ability to reference the new MessageDefinition resource in the messaging section of CapabilityStatement and note that it's an alternative to the existing structures and implementers are free to use either and provide feedback.

      Show
      Will add the ability to reference the new MessageDefinition resource in the messaging section of CapabilityStatement and note that it's an alternative to the existing structures and implementers are free to use either and provide feedback.
    • Grahame Grieve/Richard Ettema: 8-0-0
    • Correction
    • Compatible, substantive
    • DSTU1 [deprecated]

      The structures we capture to define messaging events in the spec and how they're modeled in Conformance is quite different. As well, it's not clear why we handle defining messaging events one way and OperationDefinitions another way. We need to get alignment between how we maintain/publish event and how it appears in Conformance (or whatever other resource we choose to use).

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

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: