Stream: implementers
Topic: Resource Classification
Grahame Grieve (Mar 13 2018 at 04:00):
I'm looking at GF#13042 which relates to build.fhir.org/resourceguide. I feel as though the disposition is problematic. I'm ok with replacing the classification with workflow, but simply replacing the whole second section of the page is problematic.. it's the only place where there's any explanation of the thinking behind the categorization on build.fhir.org/resourcelist.html
Grahame Grieve (Mar 13 2018 at 04:00):
@Lloyd McKenzie thoughts?
Richard Townley-O'Neill (Mar 13 2018 at 05:54):
I think that the suggestion is to remove only 2.33.1 Resource Classification, and leave 2.33.2 Clinical , 2.33.3 etc
Lloyd McKenzie (Mar 13 2018 at 11:15):
I don't see the classification section as terribly useful. The modules do a better job of organizing related content. We expose RIM class but don't explain what the RIM is. We provide short descriptions of the resource that we then have to maintain. I'm fine with the original disposition of punting the bottom half of that page. The only thing we don't have elsewhere is the assertion of Lifecycle. If that's a relevant thing, then it should probably be asserted somewhere in the intro on the resource page, not burried here.
Grahame Grieve (Mar 14 2018 at 07:09):
well, I think that simply removing it is giving up in failure. What we're looking for is a guide to the resources to help people understand them
Lloyd McKenzie (Mar 14 2018 at 14:10):
How is that different from the modules?
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
