Uploaded image for project: 'FHIR Specification Feedback'
  1. FHIR Specification Feedback
  2. FHIR-36134

Unclear how configuration options are to be used

    XMLWordPrintableJSON

Details

    • Icon: Change Request Change Request
    • Resolution: Persuasive with Modification
    • Icon: Medium Medium
    • US Da Vinci CRD (FHIR)
    • 1.1.0-ballot [deprecated]
    • Financial Mgmt
    • Supported Hooks
    • 4.3.2.3.2
    • Hide

      Dealt with by tracker item referenced in comment

      Show
      Dealt with by tracker item referenced in comment
    • Bob Dieterle / Jeff Brown : 8-0-0
    • Clarification
    • Non-substantive
    • Yes

    Description

      With no standardization of configuration options, do we have reason to think this will be useful in practice? Can we provide at least one (but preferably more than one) example of how this is expected to be used? The notes admit "This specification provides no guidance on exactly when/how CRD Clients are expected to manage hook configuration." but that feels like a weak excuse. The note "This could be done at the level of provider roles, individual providers, location from which the hook is invoked or other means. CRD Clients can experiment and determine what types of configuration make the most sense and at what levels they can support managing/persisting configuration information." further implies that clients would have prior knowledge of (and hard-coded behavior for) the options for each service, rather than dynamically interpreting the discovery response. It would be helpful to see how the client and server are expected to behave for an example option, with a clear indicator of what advantage the parties are expected to obtain from such a hard-coded behavior.

      Attachments

        Activity

          People

            Unassigned Unassigned
            sutley Spencer Utley
            Watchers:
            4 Start watching this issue

            Dates

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: