Stream: questionnaire
Topic: GF#16243 - overtaken by events
Grahame Grieve (Jul 08 2018 at 11:59):
The decision on GF#16243 looks like it's been overtaken by events - the extnsion referred to is now gone. What should we do about this?
Lloyd McKenzie (Jul 08 2018 at 13:34):
Where did the extension go?
Eric Haas (Jul 10 2018 at 20:44):
we rolled all the score extension into one. So don't need one for coding and one for option.valueString etc. I can't withdraw but can move to reopen and revote as negative?
Grahame Grieve (Jul 10 2018 at 22:01):
right. but it does require vocab approval, I think. THough we haven't really talked about who owns extensions...
Grahame Grieve (Jul 22 2018 at 21:45):
it's just not working for, extending 'ordinal value' to cover non coded data types. Firstly, the 21090 ordinal value which we are using - correctly - on codes (code system/value set/coding) is defined as CO.value (from ISO 21090/v3) and secondly, it's weird to put an 'ordinal value' on an integer - it already has one...
Lloyd McKenzie (Jul 22 2018 at 22:04):
It's weird to put an ordinal value on an integer, but in the context of a Questionnaire, there can be one that's different than the value. For example, to a question of "how many siblings did you have at home growing up", an answer of "0" might be weighted 20, "1" weighted 10, "2" weighted 5 and any number gretaer than 2 weighed 0.
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
