Uploaded image for project: 'FHIR Specification Feedback'
  1. FHIR Specification Feedback
  2. FHIR-35068

DSTU2 and R4 support status

    XMLWordPrintableJSON

Details

    • Change Request
    • Status: Published (View Workflow)
    • Highest
    • Resolution: Persuasive with Modification
    • US Core (FHIR)
    • 4.0.0
    • Cross-Group Projects
    • STU
    • DSTU2 to R4 Conversion
    • Hide

      Background: 

      The commenter is referencing this page

      DSTU2 to R4 Conversion

      There are several consideration for the user and developer experience when transitioning from FHIR DSTU2 to FHIR R4. To ensure a smoother upgrade path the following the guidance is provided.

      ...

       

      Rationale:

      We agree with the commenter that the intent of conformance expectations on this page is ambiguous and should be clarified

       

      Proposed Changes:

      1. Will clarify the Document to state that 

      "This page reflects non-normative best practices established at the time of publication."

      1. Remove all conformance language ( i.e., replace SHALL with shall)
      Show
      Background:  The commenter is referencing this page DSTU2 to R4 Conversion Introduction Endpoint Discoverability No Guarantee that Resource IDs are Preserved Expectation that DSTU2 Data is Preserved in R4 Authorization Across Versions Introduction There are several consideration for the user and developer experience when transitioning from FHIR DSTU2 to FHIR R4. To ensure a smoother upgrade path the following the guidance is provided. ...   Rationale: We agree with the commenter that the intent of conformance expectations on this page is ambiguous and should be clarified   Proposed Changes: Will clarify the Document to state that  "This page reflects non-normative best practices established at the time of publication." Remove all conformance language ( i.e., replace SHALL with shall)
    • Isaac Vetter/Eric Haas: 10-0-0
    • Clarification
    • Non-substantive

    Description

      Is the content of this section required or expected (optional). The title suggest optionality, the language suggests differently.

      Please clarify.

      Attachments

        Issue Links

          Activity

            People

              Unassigned Unassigned
              bvdh Bas van den Heuvel
              Watchers:
              2 Start watching this issue

              Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: