Stream: EBMonFHIR
Topic: Should Citation have its own copyright?
Yunwei Wang (Apr 06 2021 at 15:07):
In current profile, Citation does not have Citation.copyright. Actually I am not so sure about that. copyright is mentioned in the "Elements defined by Ancestors" but not listed directly under Citation.
Yunwei Wang (Apr 06 2021 at 15:12):
@Brian Alper
Brian Alper (Apr 06 2021 at 15:20):
Each of copyright, author, reviewer, editor and endorser could be added as top-level Citation elements in the StructureDefinition and basically follow the pattern "defined by Ancestors" in the MetadataResource. Is there a reason to do this more formally than just leave it inheritable from the ancestor pattern? @Bryn Rhodes In this case it would be the copyright for the citation itself. the copyright for the cited artifact would now be found in Citation.citedArtifact.publicationForm.copyright
Yunwei Wang (Apr 06 2021 at 15:57):
I have asked the same question at #fhir/infrastructure-wg stream. I don't know why there are some elements are explicitly listed while others are not. What the difference is.
Yunwei Wang (Apr 06 2021 at 16:50):
I got feedback from Lloyd. https://chat.fhir.org/#narrow/stream/179280-fhir.2Finfrastructure-wg/topic/Are.20all.20parent's.20elements.20inherited.20by.20child.20Resource.3F
My understanding is that Citation need to add those ancestor elements explicitly
Bryn Rhodes (Apr 06 2021 at 18:16):
There are also a few tooling issues there where the list of ancestor elements isn't necessarily correct, especially for resources that implement the MetadataResource pattern
Yunwei Wang (Apr 07 2021 at 14:25):
I think we should add it explicitly (just like jurisdiction) to Citation resource. So to avoid any tooling issue, and make it clear that copyright is an important attribute for Citation. @Brian Alper
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
