Today a colleague and I went to a potential customer, to discuss our tender. This upcoming project is also going to use HL7 v3.0 schema’s. In the documentation we received I noticed (again) that an organization made their own HL7 v3.0 Xsd implementation. So HL7 v3.0 is described as a standard, but all kinds of dialects arise. That’s a pity. Nothing learned from the past. But that’s my humble opinion.
Business Process Integration
All that matters is integration (with BizTalk Server ;-)
-
Subscribe
You can find me on
Content © Business Process Integration. Proudly powered by WordPress. To bookmark this site, press Control+D.
"Black Hat" theme by Nicki Faulk. For best results, please view with Firefox. [ Log in ]
One Comment
A correction related to the variance in HL7 v3 models: conformance in v3 is expressed in terms of models, not in terms of XSDs. The v3 standard allows one, where necessary (because the standard doesn’t yet cover a certain aspect yet) to create new models or to extend existing models – under the proviso that such extensions be fed back into the standard itself. The generation of XSDs from models is an automated process.
It is certainly desirable to have XSDs that are standardiz3ed around the world. But that requires that one standardizes human behaviour and human workflow processes – a thing that’s unlikely to happen in the near future. The variance of human behaviour is reflected in a variance in the healthcare models, and hence in the XSDs.
Be that as it may – from an implementors standpoint I understand the reason for the above ‘humble opnion’.