Hi Joel,

If the goal is to help implementers use the appropriate code system URIs, I recommend that in addition to OIDs, that the code system URIs be made available also (both pre-R4 and R4/post-R4). Otherwise, implementers will have to search for the appropriate FHIR URIs which may or may not be available somewhere else. It will make it easy for implementers (one-stop shop).

Thanks
Finnie

Hi Finnie,

Thanks for the comment. I agree with your statement and in order to maintain a version agnostic repository, I think the CodeSystem OID is more suitable for listing than the HL7 CodeSystem FHIR URI.

After discussion with LLoyd McKenzie, I understand that if an implementation is using a version of FHIR, then the implementation must use the ValueSet and CodeSystem URIs present in the specification for that version. Therefore in that sense an implementation shouldn't migrate URIs if they have been changed in a latter version of FHIR unless the implementation is migrating to that latter version. This helps us conclude that FHIR URIs are version specific.

Fro the purpose of the Terminology Gateway, having the HL7 CodeSystem OID listed is more appropriate as it hasn't changed from FHIR R3 to R4 ex: http://hl7.org/fhir/v3/ActCode VS http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/v3-ActCode. Here the OID remained unchanged - 2.16.840.1.113883.5.4 and therefore listing the OID helps maintain a version agnostic repository.

Also LLoyd helped clarify that a change in URI can be treated as a change in the CodeSystem content but in fact the change in R4 is merely a change in the Canonical URL.

Thanks,

Joel

Hi Joel,

Given that there has been change in naming convention from pre R4 to R4, if we are to proceed with this change, recommend that both the pre-R4 and R4/post-R4 URIs be provided.

Thanks
Finnie

Hello,

At a past HL7 Community call, there was a suggestion to have the Terminology Gateway display the CodeSystem OID along with the CodeSystem URI. Currently, information regarding a subset is tabulated with the following:

1. Name of CodeSystem
2. URI of Codesystem
3. Version

Just wanted to seek the community's feedback on whether there is any impact to usage and if it indeed warrants a change.

Any thoughts or suggestions are welcome.