From: owner-mnm@lists.hl7.org on behalf of Charlie McCay
[charlie@ramseysystems.co.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 5:00
AM
To: mnm@lists.hl7.org
Cc: 'cq'
Subject:
Harmonization requests - TemplateId, TypeId, Message.AttachmentText
All
I will prepare formal harmonisation proposals for
these -- but the issues have been discussed
already.
Change attachmentText from "SET_ED" to a 0..* class
called attachementText with two attributes
"id" type II
"value" type ED
This proposal was discussed at the WGM in CQ, and the
committee agreed to support the putting forwards of this harmonisation
request. The current attachemntText attribute on message was added to
support digital signatures, but can sensibly be used by an ITS to optomise the
handling of blobs of unstructured/non-hl7 data. However without an
identifier it is not possible to create a reference to the attachementText from
within the message body (except in a technology dependant
way).
This proposal is made to support a wider set of
recommendations on how binary data should be sent with HL7v3 artefacts, since
currently there are too many different
possibilities.
Change TemplateId from SET_OID to
SET_II
ProfileId is a SET_II, while TypeId and TemplateId are
a SET_OID. Since OID is in internal datatype that should only be used
for components of datatypes there is a formal reason for wanting to get
this changed. However for each of these attributes there is a need to
specify more tightly how they are to be used -- in the templates group we have
established that when clones are unrolled in a template, to be able to support
full template validation the instance needs to not only include the identifier
for the entry point of the template, but also (in at least some places) the
class within the template. To support this we have in the UK preadopted
converting templateId to a SET_II, and using an identifier scheme that has
modelId#className (ie artefactCode#className) as the
extension.
Change TypeId from SET_OID to
SET_II
I suggest that typeId should express constraints that
are part of the balloted standard, rather than localisations, and that it should
use the same syntax for doing this -- ie an identifier for the class within the
model to which conformance is being asserted.
An alternative would be to say that typeId should
include the identifier for the classes, whether in balloted content or in a
template, and that the TemplateId should only be included for the template entry
point. I believe that this is less satisfactory because it mixes
assertions about conformance to balloted and unballoted material in the same
attribute.
all the
best
Charlie
Charlie McCay, charlie@RamseySystems.co.uk Ramsey Systems Ltd,
23D Dogpole, Shrewsbury, Shropshire SY1 1ES
tel 01743 232278 / 07808
570172
************************************************
You are currently subscribed to mnm@lists.hl7.org as woody@beelers.com
To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to
leave-mnm-8574K@lists.hl7.org
To access the Archives of this list, go to:
http://lists.hl7.org/read/?forum=mnm
To access your List Server profile and
subscriptions, go to: http://lists.hl7.org/read/login