As a general rule, you want to avoid changing maxOccurs when profiling. The only time you should set maxOccurs to 0 is if it's clearly an error if the element is present - e.g. maxOccurs = 0 on deceasedDate if the patient must be alive. And if you only support receiving a single repetition, you should define a slice of the element that defines how to identify your repetition from others (possibly by defining an extension that will differentiate it).

When you prevent systems from sending data they have, you force them to create a custom interface just to talk to you. It's far better to extract the data you need and ignore the rest.

Hi Joel, I'm not sure if we should make useContext 0..0. We don't use it now, but I think we might start using it at some stage in the future.

Hi Finnie,

Thanks for your comments.

1. Agreed this can be set to fixed

2. According to the validation tables here and data from the spread sheet: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-KuJ2SzuUPklQSkzYgdlK4A7ROlZcXaKr6f6UP9wR4s/edit#gid=374564849, almost all fall within this valueset of which two (JHN and JPID ) will be proposed. Since this is extensible alternate codes not currently covered can be used.

3. Yes, for the jurisdiction it should point to ISO 3166. I had a chat with LLoyd on zulip and he requested to create a tracker item to change the binding to iso values for countries/states/territories. I have created a tracker item and will remove the created CodeSystem from simplifier:

Chat link: chat.fhir.org/#narrow/stream/implementers/topic/ValueSet.20extensibility.20clarification
Tracker id: 15869

Thanks,

Joel

Hi Joel,

Thanks for starting this work. I took a look and I have a few observations/corrections. I'm writing it here as I don't think I can log issues in the Simplifier (i.e.I don't see the Issues tab).

1) For contact.onEmail.system, recommend setting it to a fixed value of "email"
2) For type.coding.system, why is it a fixed value? Are we certain that we are only using this code system www.hl7.org/fhir/v2/0203/index.html?
3) For jurisdiction.coding.system, shoudn't the URI point to ISO 3166 (e.g. urn:iso:std:iso:3166) as the codes CA, CA-AB, etc are from ISO 3166 code system?

Thanks
Finnie

Hi Joel, where is the NamingSystem resource by itself (i.e., with OID to URI mapping)?

Hi All,

The intention of the NamingSystem resource is to define and share information about identifier and code system namespaces. The Canadian URI Registry project has been up with relevant background information, a profile of the NamingSystem resource and URI creation guidelines.
Please review the profile as the final version will be published as active after testing during the FHIR North Code Camp on April 26th 2018.
You can create issues within the project space here .

Thanks,
Joel