Uploaded image for project: 'V2 Specification Feedback'
  1. V2 Specification Feedback
  2. V2-25349

Consider renaming IG to "v2 to FHIR Messaging"

XMLWordPrintableJSON

    • Icon: Change Request Change Request
    • Resolution: Not Persuasive
    • Icon: Medium Medium
    • V2 to FHIR (V2)
    • 1.0
    • Orders & Observations
    • Introduction
    • Hide

      Motion to find not persuasive as the mappings are meant to be from the v2 standard to the FHIR standard.  It uses the FHIR messaging context to ensure that all elements of a v2 message are able to be addressed where the receiver of the v2-FHIR mapping bundle determines whether to progress with a FHIR message, set of FHIR REST API interactions, store it in FHIR resource format, etc., etc. 

      We note that FHIR does not imply a transaction/interaction method, whether message, REST, or otherwise (e.g., a FHIR bundle inside a Direct message).  Rather FHIR is a data format standard that can be used in many different exchange and access paradigms.  Thus, naming it v2-FHIR Messaging would be limiting.  While many equate FHIR to RESTful API implementations only, that represents an incorrect understanding of the FHIR standard.  It supports RESTful APIs, but is not limited to it.

      Show
      Motion to find not persuasive as the mappings are meant to be from the v2 standard to the FHIR standard.  It uses the FHIR messaging context to ensure that all elements of a v2 message are able to be addressed where the receiver of the v2-FHIR mapping bundle determines whether to progress with a FHIR message, set of FHIR REST API interactions, store it in FHIR resource format, etc., etc.  We note that FHIR does not imply a transaction/interaction method, whether message, REST, or otherwise (e.g., a FHIR bundle inside a Direct message).  Rather FHIR is a data format standard that can be used in many different exchange and access paradigms.  Thus, naming it v2-FHIR Messaging would be limiting.  While many equate FHIR to RESTful API implementations only, that represents an incorrect understanding of the FHIR standard.  It supports RESTful APIs, but is not limited to it.
    • Dan Rutz / Rob Hausam: 7-5-0

      In order to avoid confusion that the v2 to FHIR spec might cover mapping v2 to the FHIR REST API, should consider renaming it to "v2 to FHIR Messaging"?

       

      The Introduction section mentioned that the initial scope is FHIR Messaging, but I'm worried that folks who aren't reading the IG in detail might think that this project is working on v2 messaging to FHIR REST API.  Renaming the project would make the project scope more clear to casual observers.

       

      The current Introduction section text:

      Note that different FHIR workflows (e.g., messaging, RESTFul puts) may be used once the v2 to FHIR transformation has occurred. The initial project scope will support the FHIR messaging paradigm but will not be prescriptive of any particular FHIR workflow.

       

      __I'd also propose that we update that text to remove the comment about RESTful PUTS, since I don't see an obvious way that would work (more detail on why that is hard is here: https://chat.fhir.org/#narrow/stream/179188-v2-to-FHIR/topic/Messaging.20to.20REST.20API.20conversion)

            Unassigned Unassigned
            cooper.thompson Cooper Thompson
            Watchers:
            2 Start watching this issue

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: