FHIR Chat · R5 Normative · fmg

Stream: fmg

Topic: R5 Normative


view this post on Zulip John Moehrke (Feb 15 2022 at 19:26):

Security WG confirmed that AuditEvent should be normative track in R5. The committee wanted to further discuss Provenance, with a likely approval but concern with current elements tagged as TI.

view this post on Zulip John Moehrke (Feb 18 2022 at 16:01):

will R5 fix the fact that the normative Resources in R4 do not have normative search parameters?

view this post on Zulip Lloyd McKenzie (Feb 18 2022 at 16:38):

Not discussed as yet. And keeping the search parameters 'STU' was intentional in R4.

view this post on Zulip John Moehrke (Feb 18 2022 at 17:36):

I was not aware that was intentional. unfortunate as it is preventing Implementation Guides from going Normative.

view this post on Zulip Lloyd McKenzie (Feb 18 2022 at 17:56):

Why?

view this post on Zulip Lloyd McKenzie (Feb 18 2022 at 17:57):

Not everything in the IG has to be normative for the IG to go normative

view this post on Zulip Lloyd McKenzie (Feb 18 2022 at 17:57):

It was a conscious choice because a whole lot of the search parameters haven't been well exercised and no review had happened as to which ones were solid and which weren't.

view this post on Zulip John Moehrke (Feb 18 2022 at 20:44):

that might be HL7 rules, but it is not other organizations rules.

view this post on Zulip Lloyd McKenzie (Feb 18 2022 at 22:08):

Other organization's may be in for a rough ride taking anything normative then. The chances that all elements you care about will be completely normative aren't going to be terribly high for a while...

view this post on Zulip John Moehrke (Feb 18 2022 at 22:40):

I don't understand why the search parameters can't be taken normative... or even why they were held back in R4. what is the rational?

view this post on Zulip Lloyd McKenzie (Feb 18 2022 at 22:53):

It's not that they can't be, it's that we didn't want them to all be normative - because a bunch aren't well exercised - and perhaps shouldn't even exist. And we didn't have the bandwidth to evaluate them at the time to decide what should be in and what shouldn't be.

view this post on Zulip Lloyd McKenzie (Feb 18 2022 at 22:54):

We figured it was better to leave them all STU than have some become normative inappropriately.

view this post on Zulip John Moehrke (Feb 18 2022 at 22:55):

So, presumably we have a rational for promoting some to normative? I think some are quite exercised.

view this post on Zulip Lloyd McKenzie (Feb 18 2022 at 22:58):

The criteria for SearchParameters are the same as everything else. If someone has time to go through and evaluate the parameters against the criteria, we could include those as normative candidates.


Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC