Stream: implementers
Topic: Merging profiles
Kailash (May 05 2020 at 13:17):
Hi - I am creating profiles(SD) based on two existing IG's, use case is like -
Patient profile A - http://hl7.org/fhir/us/core/StructureDefinition/us-core-patient(US Core)
Patient profile B - http://example/fhir/someProvider/StructureDefinition/BPatient
Patient merged profile C in below two approaches (Dependencies on both A and B packages)
1) (base definition A) C = Extend A and incorporate maximum variations from B
2) (base definition B) C = Extend B and incorporate maximum variations from A
On what basis I should decide what would be the best approach either (1)(base definition A) or (2)(base definition B) for C?
or is there any best practice or guide lines I should refer to?
Lloyd McKenzie (May 05 2020 at 15:25):
Generally, whichever involves adding the least incremental constraint/information. But that's only "best practice" insofar as it means less work for the developer. As each of the profiles evolve, it's possible that answer might change too.
Kailash (May 05 2020 at 16:39):
Thank you @Lloyd McKenzie for the valuable input !
Kailash (May 06 2020 at 12:02):
@Lloyd McKenzie , Publication status could be the criteria in this case right? If publication status of definition (A is Active) and (B is Draft) then I would prefer to extend the definition A as it is mature then B and there are least probability of changes than the B. Thanks
Lloyd McKenzie (May 06 2020 at 15:19):
Possibly - though quite often they'll both have the same status
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
