Stream: implementers
Topic: Profile naming conventions
Noemi Deppenwiese (Jul 26 2019 at 13:41):
What is the current convention for assigning profile names? I could not find any guidelines in the FHIR spec.
E.g., I created a profile called "Donor" based on patient. Can I just name it "Donor" or should I always use the project prefix, e.g. "BbmriDonor"? Or is this redundant since the URL already specifies the project (https://fhir.bbmri.de/StructureDefinition/BbmriDonor)? And what is the convention for profiles with potential naming conflicts, e.g. it is allowed that a profile on Condition is just named Condition, or should it be BbmriCondition to avoid confusion?
Thanks!
Lloyd McKenzie (Jul 26 2019 at 14:21):
There are two names: title and name. Both should be unique in the context of an implementation guide. Beyond that, title should be meaningful to humans and not overly long. Name should be what you would want a Java,.NET or similar class to be named if scoped by a package that contains everything in the IG
.
Lloyd McKenzie (Jul 26 2019 at 14:21):
In short, no need to prefix with the IG name.
Noemi Deppenwiese (Jul 26 2019 at 14:33):
So, in my example i would use Donor and BbmriCondition as unique names. Thanks for the explanation!
Lloyd McKenzie (Jul 26 2019 at 14:54):
You could even just use 'Condition', but given that you'd likely be using the HL7 Condition resource too and would prefer not to specify org.somewhere.something.foo.Condition, prefixing with Bbmri when it's the same as a FHIR resource is reasonable.
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
