FHIR Chat · must support for element A or element B · conformance

Stream: conformance

Topic: must support for element A or element B


view this post on Zulip Eric Haas (Jul 24 2020 at 21:54):

Is there a way in the current tooling to say must support element A OR element B (OR Both).

view this post on Zulip Eric Haas (Jul 24 2020 at 21:55):

In other words a conditional must support

view this post on Zulip Lloyd McKenzie (Jul 24 2020 at 22:06):

not formally. However, you can provide usage notes that qualify the meaning of must support for a given element. I'd probably flag them both (so they show up in the mustSupport view, and then include usage notes indicating the expectation to support either or. We could look at adding an explicit "mustSupport qualifier" element on ElementDefinition which would allow us to put a flag and perhaps a fly-over on the mustSupport indicator to specifically highlight that there are special rules. However, thus far, special rules on a per-element basis seem to be very rare.

view this post on Zulip Brian Postlethwaite (Aug 26 2020 at 11:49):

Seems a funny thing to be communicating through must support.
An invariant rule would make sense if that's what is really being required.

view this post on Zulip Jens Villadsen (Aug 26 2020 at 15:18):

And then set it with warning level

view this post on Zulip Richard Townley-O'Neill (Aug 26 2020 at 23:12):

I think of must support being about the system, not the data, and there being no way to tell from the data that an item is not supported.
In that case an invariant that tests data cannot check for the support.


Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC