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

Model Annex81 vs Profile Annex81: identifier cardinality and MS does not fit #416

Open
bdc-ehealth opened this issue Dec 2, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #430
Open

Model Annex81 vs Profile Annex81: identifier cardinality and MS does not fit #416

bdc-ehealth opened this issue Dec 2, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #430

Comments

@bdc-ehealth
Copy link
Collaborator

@SmalsJulien @NathanPeeters

The cardinality of the identifier and MS indication differ between the logical model and the profile.

Please advise!

@bdc-ehealth
Copy link
Collaborator Author

see #400

@NathanPeeters
Copy link
Collaborator

NathanPeeters commented Dec 4, 2024

The identifier will be created by Uhmep (no info about identifier in the payload, and then identifier is created at reception in UHMEP system). => 0..* (because we have also a shortcode)
In the logicalmodel of annex81, referralid is mandatory and shortcode optional, so here it is 0..* because integrators don't create the id and shortcode themselves (uhmep creates it at reception).

@bdc-ehealth bdc-ehealth linked a pull request Dec 6, 2024 that will close this issue
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

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants