Stream: terminology
Topic: BCP-47
Matt Rouhana (Jun 28 2021 at 22:36):
Is urn:ietf:bcp:47 a true CodeSystem? I understand that it's being treated as one throughout the FHIR spec; however, all BCP-47 really does is define a best practice for creating language codes with a consistent structure/syntax. The meaning is assigned to those codes by other authorities (e.g., ISO), not the IANA. This would seem to make BCP-47 an intensional ValueSet, where inclusion in the ValueSet is contingent on a ReGex match as defined in BCP-47.
Am I misunderstanding?
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 28 2021 at 23:21):
bcp:47 defines a grammar for codes that have a defined meaning. The fact that the constituents of the grammar are other code systems doesn't matter. It defines what codes are valid and the meaning to be inferred from them - as such, it's a code system.
Matt Rouhana (Jun 30 2021 at 13:49):
@Lloyd McKenzie thanks for the clarification. As such, is the use of constituent code systems allowed in Patient.communication.language, from a validation perspective? Or does the system for that element always need to be urn:ietf:bcp:47?
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 30 2021 at 14:50):
The system always needs to be urn:ietf:bcp:47 - that's based on the binding. If the binding is to a CodeableConcept, then you might have translations to other systems.
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
