Jan 2015 Ballot Comment #419

XMLWordPrintableJSON

    • Type: Change Request
    • Resolution: Considered - No action required
    • Priority: Medium
    • FHIR Core (FHIR)
    • DSTU1 [deprecated]
    • Terminology Infrastructure
    • ValueSet
    • 6.13.6.1 Versioning Code Systems
    • Hide

      3/19/2015

      It is good vocabulary practice to specify the version when creating the content logical definition, but cannot be required.

      Move: Rob M./Russ
      Opposed: 0 Abstain: 0 In Favor: 7

      Show
      3/19/2015 It is good vocabulary practice to specify the version when creating the content logical definition, but cannot be required. Move: Rob M./Russ Opposed: 0 Abstain: 0 In Favor: 7
    • Enhancement

      Existing Wording
      The version specific identifier SHOULD be provided whenever there are potentially significant changes in meaning across multiple releases of a code system.

      Proposed Wording
      The version specific identifier MUST be provided whenever there are potentially significant changes in meaning across multiple releases of a code system.

      Grahame's Comments
      hah, no one does this. Does Russ do this for LOINC everywhere in CDA? (in fact, does everybody?) We cannot legislate things people won't do. Also, this could become retrospectively true - a release is made with a signfiicant change, and now all systems are in violation because of something that happened after they were implemneted. No, SHOULD is right here

      Disposition
      Not persuasive

      Disposition Comment
      Not all systems are capable of knowing the version-specific identifier, nor will they necessarily be in a position to know that significant changes of meaning will have occurred. Thus SHALL isn't reasonable

            Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            Russell Hamm
            Watchers:
            2 Start watching this issue

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: