Stream: ihe
Topic: DocumentReference.date 1..1
Simone Heckmann (Oct 04 2021 at 10:07):
What is the motivation behind the 1..1 cardinality on DocumentReference.date?
This discussion indicates, that it is considered as rather unimportant, even a candidate for removal.
However, the MHD Comprehensive DocumentReference mandates it.
I couldn't find any mapping to XDS, so I wonder why this decision was made...?
Simone Heckmann (Oct 04 2021 at 12:57):
Quick correction: The constraint is introduced in MHD Comprehensive DocumentReference Uncontained from where it propagates into the profile mentioned above
Simone Heckmann (Oct 04 2021 at 13:10):
date is also listed among the optional search parameters for ITI-67, but again, there is no mapping to an equivalent XDS-parameter.
Note 5 on the mapping of the creationparameter "The FHIR DocumentReference does not yet have a query parameter for creationTime of the document, it has only a date element which is the creation date/time of the DocumentReference. For FHIR R4 we align these two elements so that query will function." makes a reference to date which is presumably out of date, since no apparent alignment has occured in R4, but the creation parameter is non the less currently functional as a custom parameter.
Is it possible that date is a remnant of the 'before times', when the creation search didn't work...?
John Moehrke (Oct 11 2021 at 12:59):
Ill look into this.
John Moehrke (Oct 11 2021 at 14:05):
I can't find a justification. i think it is from the STU3 days where we used the .date because there was no actual creation date/time that was available to be queried. Where as now we added the DocumentReference-Creation search parameter.
John Moehrke (Oct 11 2021 at 14:05):
seems like it is still a useful element, just not anything that should be mandated.
John Moehrke (Oct 11 2021 at 14:09):
can you create an issue? I am not sure what to change it to. there is no IHE-DocumentSharing metadata reason for it to be populated or query parameter. so by that definition it should be 0..0. But it was used in the past and would have historically been 1..1. so not clear to me what the right change would be.
Simone Heckmann (Oct 13 2021 at 19:38):
https://github.com/IHE/ITI.MHD/issues/94
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
