FHIR Chat · Trackers for v2 to FHIR IG

Hi all, I noticed when doing ballot comments that there is not the ability to set up a FHIR Tracker/JIRA Ticket for issues in the v2 to FHIR IG. (v2 to FHIR is not a choice in the Specification section) Since ballot closed, I have found some broken links and would like to report but don't know where to do this, please advise.

Lloyd McKenzie (Sep 17 2020 at 16:43):

@Hans Buitendijk

Riki Merrick (Sep 17 2020 at 17:04):

That's because that is a V2 project and that is NOT yet in JIRA

Riki
Riki Merrick
Vernetzt, LLC
rikimerrick@gmail.com
cell: 916.216.0052
skype: riki.merrick

Hans Buitendijk (Sep 17 2020 at 17:31):

@Lloyd McKenzie ? You're pinging me? Is v2-to-FHIR in JIRA? Would be FANTASTIC news!

Lloyd McKenzie (Sep 17 2020 at 18:03):

I wasn't sure which product family it was tied to. If it's v2 product family then the answer is "probably supported sometime late October".

Melva Peters (Sep 17 2020 at 18:08):

It is not in JIRA at this point as it is in the V2 Product Family.

Jean Duteau (Sep 17 2020 at 18:25):

hmm, then it's unfortunate that the "Propose a Change" links are at the bottom of all of the pages, especially because I just finished teaching a course and told people to use that link if they had any questions/concerns/changes to report.

Lloyd McKenzie (Sep 17 2020 at 18:36):

Yeah, we're not used to the IG template being used for any project that isn't part of the FHIR product family. Question - did the IG use the 'v2' template or the FHIR one?

Linda (Sep 17 2020 at 19:33):

So Riki in the meantime where can I log these?

Hans Buitendijk (Sep 17 2020 at 19:36):

I believe @Keith Boone started with FHIR, not v2. At the same time, intent confirmed with FMG is that when it is published it should appear in the FHIR IG registry (as well) given FHIR content.
@Jean Duteau : The links to "Propose a Change" were removed prior to the ballot to avoid getting feedback by spreadsheet and by that mechanism. We are hoping JIRA is up shortly so then everything can work that way.
@Linda : If you did not submit a ballot, please us this: https://confluence.hl7.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=91987218.

Melva Peters (Sep 17 2020 at 19:44):

I just triaged a bunch from Keith for V2 to Fhir, but he linked them to the FHIR Path specification so they need to be fixed! @Lloyd McKenzie

Lloyd McKenzie (Sep 17 2020 at 20:22):

Sigh. We've got a couple of options. We can treat "v2 to FHIR" like CDS Hooks, FHIRPath and a few other specifications that (according to the TSC) are not part of the FHIR product family, but which (according to the community and with FMG blessing) are treated as though they are and are subject to FMG rules and handled using the FHIR tracker. We could then define V2-to-FHIR as a "FHIR" specification and things will work swimmingly starting now.

Or - we can say that this is a spec that really does belong in the v2 product family and just leave issues submitted in the FHIR tracker as un-triaged (and unresolvable) until such time as the V2 tracker is up, at which point the items can be 'moved' to the proper tracker (which will change all of their keys).

The delay in getting the v2 tracker up is that we've made a bunch of changes - some as recently as last week - to better allow migration of content from JiraDev to HL7 Jira production, as well as some changes that allow for multiple feedback trackers - one per family. Those changes haven't been well tested yet and we didn't want to migrate them into production until they'd been tested a bit. As well, we've learned from experience that making any significant changes to tracker behavior is not a great idea when a ballot has just closed, there's a WGM right away and co-chairs are trying to get all of their ballot results imported. That's what drove my assertion of 'late October'. If we feel we can safely do it sooner than that, we will.

Hans Buitendijk (Sep 19 2020 at 01:29):

@Lloyd McKenzie : While unresolveable are they viewable? Given timing, more important we can see and then resolve later. Not in favor of considering v2-to-FHIR a FHIR IG subject to all matter FHIR. If there was some neutral space, would be ideal, but as it originates in v2, is closer there. When doing FHIR-to-v2, then that one is closer to FHIR and should live there if there is no neutral, cross-paradigm space.

Lloyd McKenzie (Sep 19 2020 at 02:18):

Yes, they'll be viewable

Melva Peters (Sep 19 2020 at 14:35):

@Hans Buitendijk some still have status of submitted. Others are triaged with O&O as the WG. But are tied to the Fhirpath spec

Keith Boone (Sep 19 2020 at 16:35):

@Melva Peters From me for V2 to FHIR? I'm thoroughly uncertain about that. I KNOW I just submitted several for FHIRPath which were NOT V2 to FHIR Related.

Melva Peters (Sep 19 2020 at 16:43):

@Keith Boone sorry, my mistake...yours were correct. It was someone else that submitted them...

Hans Buitendijk (Sep 19 2020 at 21:55):

@Melva Peters , @Lloyd McKenzie Tried to search with "Work Group" = "Orders & Observations [oo]" AND "Specification" = "FHIRPath" but does not show up. "Work Group" = "Orders & Observations [oo]" AND "Specification" = "FHIRPath (FHIR)" is not accepted either.