Uploaded image for project: 'FHIR Specification Feedback'
  1. FHIR Specification Feedback
  2. FHIR-33883

mentioning V2 and CDA in a way that implies FHIR is behind

    XMLWordPrintableJSON

Details

    • Icon: Change Request Change Request
    • Resolution: Persuasive
    • Icon: Medium Medium
    • FHIR Data Segmentation for Privacy (FHIR)
    • 0.3.0
    • Security
    • STU
    • Background
    • Hide

      Restructured the section.

      Adding the clarifying sentence about FHIR in the beginning of the paragraph.

      Moving the CDA and V2 discussion into a subsection at the end.

      Show
      Restructured the section. Adding the clarifying sentence about FHIR in the beginning of the paragraph. Moving the CDA and V2 discussion into a subsection at the end.
    • Mohammad Jafari / Christopher Schaut: 4-0-1
    • Enhancement
    • Non-substantive

    Description

      in section 1, you start to talk about HL7 v2 and CDA support for tagging... which is good background. These likely should be in a sub header, as the IG is about FHIR. and as such the IG should express clearly that FHIR from the START has had tagging as part of the model. This can be expressed as "because of the history with v2 and cda".  As currently stated it would seem that by the time the reader is done with section 1, they think that FHIR needs to now be retrofitted.

      Attachments

        Activity

          People

            jafarim Mohammad Jafari
            john_moehrke John Moehrke
            John Moehrke
            Watchers:
            2 Start watching this issue

            Dates

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: