Uploaded image for project: 'FHIR Specification Feedback'
  1. FHIR Specification Feedback
  2. FHIR-38415

Clarify deviceName profiling.

    XMLWordPrintableJSON

Details

    • Icon: Change Request Change Request
    • Resolution: Persuasive
    • Icon: Highest Highest
    • At-Home In-Vitro Test Report (FHIR)
    • 1.0.0-ballot
    • Orders & Observations
    • Implementation Guide
    • 7.2.1
    • Hide

      Have changed the type of this comment from Question to Change Request.

      Note that this actually should have been "model-name" and will be updated to that based on another comment (FHIR-38216).

      However, will also update to allow more than just the one deviceName.

      Show
      Have changed the type of this comment from Question to Change Request. Note that this actually should have been "model-name" and will be updated to that based on another comment ( FHIR-38216 ). However, will also update to allow more than just the one deviceName.
    • Sarah Gaunt / Riki Merrick : 6 - 0 - 3
    • Correction
    • Compatible, substantive

    Description

      Why prohibit any devicename other than a manufacturer name? Wouldn't it make more sense to require a manufacturer name slice, with other names optional?

      (Comment 40 - imported by: Ron G. Parker)

      Attachments

        Activity

          People

            minigrrl Sarah Gaunt
            esilver Elliot Silver
            Watchers:
            1 Start watching this issue

            Dates

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: