Revisions to use case section: additional functionalities to declare out of scope

Several other functionalities have been asked about by various stakeholders in this process and may be worth specifically declaring  out of scope.

Specifically issues such as: receiving feedback from users on the quality of service information, as well as feedback on the quality of services themselves.

Also, this IG does not address challenges of service directory federation; it assumes a one-to-many relationship between the source of information and users. 

We also might consider stipulation that this IG does not include requirements or recommendations for classification of services in a taxonomy, and only offers examples of how to do so; however, we have not addressed this in the suggested edit below.

A revised 'out of scope' section could read this like: 

Out of Scope for this Release:

• Assessing eligibility for services is currently out of scope, though may be added to a future release.
• This IG does not address questions of user-submitted feedback about the quality of resource directory information (accuracy, clarity, etc); write-enabled ‘bi-directional’ functionality may be specified in future versions. 
• This IG does not specify mechanisms for gathering feedback from users about the quality of services themselves.
• Queries of federated resource directory information sources is out of scope; this IG addresses only instances in which a single source of resource directory information is made available for querying by a FHIR-enabled client.