Stream: ig publishing requirements
Topic: Poll on use of MAY in IGs
Vassil Peytchev (Dec 08 2021 at 19:07):
/poll Use of MAY in capability statements in IGs
I use MAY and expect it to be rendered to convey valuable nuance in implementation decisions
I use MAY, and expect it to be rendered, but find no useful difference between MAY and omitted capabilities
I use MAY only as a structural help for other rendering purposes, and do not expect it to be rendered.
Eric Haas (Dec 08 2021 at 23:16):
I rendered may and implementers got confused and we got trackers so I removed them..
Lloyd McKenzie (Dec 09 2021 at 03:58):
You could simply have defined your intent... I feel it's essential to be able to call attention to interactions, operations, etc. that could be useful for the use-case that should at least be considered for implementation without marking them as "SHOULD" to disambiguate from the large set of resources and operations that have no utility at all for the use-case.
Vassil Peytchev (Dec 09 2021 at 04:26):
Can we come up with language that explains clearly what the intent of MAY is, and makes it clear that things that are not mentioned are still optional to be implemented? As far as I understand, the main issue is that if you have SHALL, SHOULD, and MAY, a lot of people assume that everything else is prohibited.
Lloyd McKenzie (Dec 09 2021 at 06:34):
Sure. "Any FHIR capability is presumed to be 'allowed' by the system unless explicitly marked as "SHALL NOT". A few items are explicitly marked as MAY. This is done to highlight their potential relevance to the use-case and distinguish them from un-mentioned optional capabilities that have been deemed not likely relevant."
Corey Spears (Dec 09 2021 at 18:44):
@Lloyd McKenzie expressed my interpretation of MAY and how it is often used.
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
