Canadian FHIR Baseline Profiles - Governance Stream Meeting - February 21st, 2-3pm EST

Attendees

Michael Savage
Igor Sirkovich
Sheridan Cook
Ben Macerola
Elliot Silver
Janice Spence
Ken Sinn
Kunj Joshi
Rita Pyle
Russ Buchanan
Shamil Nizamov

Walkthrough of Cardinality and Must-Support Definitions Deck

• Sheridan walked the group through a review of the matrix of definitions for Configurations A-D (emphasis on the Create/Update scenario)
• Mike walked the group through the new example slides which present a step-by-step interaction between client and server for each of the four configurations
• Discussion of concept of non-fixed / meaningful
o Sufficient to just keep the term ‘meaningful’
o Add asterisk, and below state that the exact definition which qualifies a value as meaningful is to be defined on a case-by-case basis (i.e. in the specific project)
• Discussion: for ‘0..1, MS=No’ elements, can we still say server MUST be capable of receiving the element if it comes to them
o Server can’t ‘choke’ if it receives an optional element
o Pretty sure this is a standard FHIR rule
• Suggestion: when this content is published to simplifier / the iGuide, should include emails / contact info so all audiences can provide feedback

Please continue to review the deck! Eventually the content will be displayed on simplifier, but for the time being please continue to access the latest timestamped version from infocentral.infoway-inforoute.ca/en/resources/docs/hl7/canadian-core-profiles

(the document is Canadian Core Profiles - Must Support / Cardinality Definitions w/ Examples - Feb 21 2020)

Other Items

• Feedback on US Core profiles has been that they’re too constrained to be useful in some derived implementations
• Question: any implementers using run-time validation of FHIR messages?
o Better for integration testing, but can cause slow performance for production purposes
o Can use custom code for business rule validation, and something like HAPI library for structural validation
o Could use a JSON schema for validation, but this wont validate business rules or terminology usage
o Some guidance on these options (pros/cons) exists on the main HL7 FHIR site

It looks cool at the first glance. Let's delve deeper tomorrow.

Hi all!

For this Friday's call we will be continuing with the discussion of Cardinality & Must Support definitions as provided in the deck we've been sharing over the last couple of Governance calls. We've added a sample workflow for each of the 4 configurations we've defined (for both Query and Update scenarios). This will be a big component of what we'll want to walk through on the Friday call. You can find an updated deck with these sample workflows for your advance review here:

infocentral.infoway-inforoute.ca/en/resources/docs/hl7/canadian-core-profiles

(the document is Canadian Core Profiles - Must Support / Cardinality Definitions w/ Examples - Feb 19 2020 New)