Incorrect type and redefinition of PARTY.uid
Raise
Analysis
Raise
Analysis
Description
PR is addressed in
Activity
Show:
Thomas Beale November 13, 2018 at 10:52 AM
I'm not sure where this came from, but I agree, the original 1.0.2 PDF doesn't have it and the HTML PDF does. So I think we need to regard this as an error in moving to the new UML tool, and we need to reverse it.
Done
Details
Details
Reporter
Sebastian IancuLabels
Components
Affects versions
Priority
MajorCreated November 12, 2018 at 8:55 PM
Updated December 18, 2018 at 8:55 AM
Resolved December 18, 2018 at 8:55 AM
I have the impression PARTY class got a new 'redefine' of uid attribute somewhere between v1.0.0 and v1.0.1. Previously was addressed or touched in SPEC-194.
The only thing that mentions something about uid (indirectly) is the following text from section https://www.openehr.org/releases/RM/Release-1.0.2/docs/demographic/demographic.html#_party_identification:
"Identifiers of Party instances in the system are provided in the same way as identifiers of Compositions in the EHR: via the uid attribute (type OBJECT_VERSION_ID) of the containing VERSION. "
If I'm not mistaken this is just an export problem of UML, than propagated to specs.
I think the correct type is the one that inherits from LOCATABLE (so UID_BASED_ID). I'm not sure though if this attribute should be required or not, overriding optional state from LOCATABLE. At least Code24 always implemented this as specified in from LOCATABLE.