Uploaded image for project: 'FHIR Specification Feedback'
  1. FHIR Specification Feedback
  2. FHIR-42563

Assert assumption about state transition order

    XMLWordPrintableJSON

Details

    • Icon: Change Request Change Request
    • Resolution: Persuasive
    • Icon: Highest Highest
    • Canonical Resource Management Infrastructure (FHIR)
    • 1.0.0-ballot [deprecated]
    • Clinical Decision Support
    • (NA)
    • Hide

      Agreed, assert requirements for state transitions for versioning. Make clear that artifacts cannot go from active to draft, that requires a new version. Even in the case that an artifact was mistakenly published as active, it would require a new version to go back to draft.

      Show
      Agreed, assert requirements for state transitions for versioning. Make clear that artifacts cannot go from active to draft, that requires a new version. Even in the case that an artifact was mistakenly published as active, it would require a new version to go back to draft.
    • Floyd Eisenberg/Greg White: 13-0-0
    • Clarification
    • Non-substantive

    Description

      Nothing in the FHIR core spec prevents an artifact from going from active to draft, nor from retired to active. If this IG depends on a linear progression of states, it should make that requirement explicit. It should also explain how to deal with situations where an artifact is progressed to a status accidentally

      (Comment 23 - imported by: Lloyd McKenzie)

      Attachments

        Activity

          People

            Unassigned Unassigned
            lloyd Lloyd McKenzie
            Watchers:
            2 Start watching this issue

            Dates

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: