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

[Validator] Support profiles on backbone elements #464

Closed
ewoutkramer opened this issue Oct 27, 2017 · 5 comments
Closed

[Validator] Support profiles on backbone elements #464

ewoutkramer opened this issue Oct 27, 2017 · 5 comments

Comments

@ewoutkramer
Copy link
Member

What if.....

  1. We create a logical model representing a Document.section Section
  2. We create section profiles with this logical model as the base
  3. Invent an extension "documentSectionProfile" that goes on the typeref for Document.section and which is a valueUrl with the canonical for the section profile
  4. Let Grahame and me hack our validators to trigger validation via that logical model in STU3.
@wmrutten
Copy link
Contributor

wmrutten commented Dec 5, 2017

  1. We create section profiles with this logical model as the base

As far as I'm aware, FHIR does not allow a profile to be based on a logical model?

@ewoutkramer
Copy link
Member Author

Sure it does, why not? Same logic applies, it's just a set of constraints

@wmrutten
Copy link
Contributor

Theoretically, yes. But FHIR has not formally defined this yet. Not supported in Forge.
Anyway we could decide to allow this, but it seems like a hack. IMHO proper approach is to elevate all backbone elements to proper data types. Then we wouldn't need to introduce new irregularities.

@ewoutkramer
Copy link
Member Author

This was about fixing stuff in STU3 - with backwards compatibility, so defining proper data types is no solution...

@ewoutkramer
Copy link
Member Author

There's now even an extension for it, so you can for example create profiles just for sections of a Document resource. But until someone asks, we'll wait to do this.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants