Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update Consolidated CDA Templates for Clinical Notes (US Realm) DSTU … #26

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mjszczep
Copy link
Collaborator

…R2.1.sch

When we check for R1.1 templateIds, we currently check against a specific set of R2.1 templateId root + extension combos and then make sure that there's a matching R1.1 templateId.

But this doesn't seem particularly robust against future changes. Suppose we bump the extension for one of these templates; we'd need to either have two copies of it (one with the old extension and one with the new) or else we'd lose the ability to make sure that the old root+extension combo still had a matching R1.1 templateId!

I think the better thing to do is to say "in a C-CDA document, an R1.1 templateId with ANY extension at all needs to have a matching extensionless R1.1 templateId." That solves the versioning problem, simplifies the logic, and feels more or less like what C-CDA's trying to go for anyway!

…R2.1.sch

When we check for R1.1 templateIds, we currently check against a specific set of R2.1 templateId root + extension combos and then make sure that there's a matching R1.1 templateId.

But this doesn't seem particularly robust against future changes. Suppose we bump the extension for one of these templates; we'd need to either have two copies of it (one with the old extension and one with the new) or else we'd lose the ability to make sure that the old root+extension combo still had a matching R1.1 templateId!

I think the better thing to do is to say "in a C-CDA document, an R1.1 templateId with ANY extension at all needs to have a matching extensionless R1.1 templateId." That solves the versioning problem, simplifies the logic, and feels more or less like what C-CDA's trying to go for anyway!
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant