Uploaded image for project: 'FHIR Specification Feedback'
  1. FHIR Specification Feedback
  2. FHIR-32585

Why do we have both related and relatedTo?

    XMLWordPrintableJSON

Details

    • Icon: Change Request Change Request
    • Resolution: Persuasive with Modification
    • Icon: Highest Highest
    • FHIR Core (FHIR)
    • R4
    • Orders & Observations
    • DocumentReference
    • Hide

      The plan is to remove .related and add DocumentReference to the list of resources using the workflow-supportingInfo

      The XDS mapping for .related would need to move to workflow-supportingInfo. 

      Show
      The plan is to remove .related and add DocumentReference to the list of resources using the workflow-supportingInfo The XDS mapping for .related would need to move to workflow-supportingInfo. 
    • John Moehrke / Rob Hausam : 4 - 0 - 0
    • Enhancement
    • Non-compatible
    • R5

    Description

      These things should be combined. Also, having an open ended reference that just says "related" is unacceptable. There needs to be some conveyance of the type of relationship. Other possibility is to push this to extensions - extensions can be defined for particular types of relationships relevant in different circumstances.

      (Comment 147 - imported by: Ron G. Parker)

      Attachments

        Activity

          People

            john_moehrke John Moehrke
            lloyd Lloyd McKenzie
            Lloyd McKenzie, Ron G. Parker
            Watchers:
            4 Start watching this issue

            Dates

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: