Stream: implementers
Topic: Virtual locations
Richard Townley-O'Neill (Jan 19 2021 at 00:27):
We want to expand the stated scope of Location to include virtual locations.
We are modelling healthcare services for a registry. Some services are provided virtually. We are modelling this as a service provided at a virtual Location (one with a physical type of virtual). See our latest draft at AU Base Location and LocationPhysicalTypeAUExtended
Is there any reason to not expand the scope of Location this way?
Lloyd McKenzie (Jan 19 2021 at 00:55):
You can have an encounter that says it's virtual. What would it mean to have an explicit Location instance? What elements would be relevant? What would cause you to have 2 virtual locations vs. 1 vs. 1000?
Richard Townley-O'Neill (Jan 19 2021 at 23:23):
@Brett Esler
Brett Esler (Feb 02 2021 at 23:55):
Sorry for slow follow up; @Lloyd McKenzie we were looking at this with respect to directory entries as HealthcareService.location where Location referenced is Location.mode = kind - so this is somewhat about defining a virtual delivery platform in Location.type - similar to MOBL - mobile ; and AMB - ambulance concepts @Brian Postlethwaite
Lloyd McKenzie (Feb 03 2021 at 06:57):
Ok, but that still doesn't answer the question of when (and why) you'd choose to have only a single 'virtual' Location in the registry vs. 100s or 1000s. What would make a virtual location 'distinct'?
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
