Stream: implementers
Topic: Adding "old" to Identifier.use
Lloyd McKenzie (May 23 2017 at 21:04):
On today's MnM call, we tentatively approved a substantive change to the Identifier data type. Because the data types are FMM level 5, we are soliciting implementer feedback on the change. The details are here: GF#13265. The gist of the proposed change is to add an "old" use code for Identifier, similar to the codes we have on HumanName, Address and ContactPoint for use with identifiers that are no longer 'valid' for the resource on which they appear, but may still be useful for search purposes. Please identify any concerns you see with making this substantive (but backward compatible) change.
Eric Haas (May 23 2017 at 22:53):
'deprecated' or 'retired' seems a more appropriate term than "old" My SSN is old but still useful ( less could be said about me)
Paul Knapp (May 24 2017 at 12:49):
or 'prior'
Lloyd McKenzie (May 24 2017 at 13:28):
Main reason for using 'old' is that's consistent with the codes we have for name, address and telecom.
Eric Haas (May 24 2017 at 14:37):
okidokie
Grahame Grieve (May 24 2017 at 19:54):
I'd like to clarify the definition of 'valid' for all those types while we're at it. An address doesn't become invalid because I no longer live there. It's my association with the address that is no longer valid. Same for the other types. I'd like to clarify the language on old for all types to make this clear
Richard Townley-O'Neill (May 25 2017 at 00:50):
Maybe use 'current' instead of 'valid' when speaking of not 'old'.
Brian Postlethwaite (Jun 05 2017 at 03:43):
And the use of the period to cover when it was appropriate for use, and then no longer is.
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
