PCD Technical Framework vol. 2 Errata: Difference between revisions
nu |
m c |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
<p>In addition, the Technical Framework has field names that are "out of step" with the field attributes fields from NTE-4 on.</p> | <p>In addition, the Technical Framework has field names that are "out of step" with the field attributes fields from NTE-4 on.</p> | ||
<p>This has no operational effect on PCD implementers, since these fields are "X" "Not Implemented", but the erratum will be applied in future TF versions.</p> | <p>This has no operational effect on PCD implementers, since these fields are "X" "Not Implemented", but the erratum will be applied in future TF versions.</p> | ||
'''Current text''' | |||
<p>Table B.4-1 NTE - Notes and Comment segment</p> | <p>Table B.4-1 NTE - Notes and Comment segment</p> | ||
<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> | <table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> | ||
| Line 93: | Line 96: | ||
</tr> | </tr> | ||
</table> | </table> | ||
'''Proposed corrected text''' | |||
<p>Table B.4-1 NTE - Notes and Comment segment</p> | <p>Table B.4-1 NTE - Notes and Comment segment</p> | ||
<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> | <table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> | ||
| Line 164: | Line 170: | ||
<td width="83"><p> </p></td> | <td width="83"><p> </p></td> | ||
<td width="81"><p>01004</p></td> | <td width="81"><p>01004</p></td> | ||
<td width="281"><p> | <td width="281"><p>Entered Date/Time</p></td> | ||
</tr> | </tr> | ||
<tr> | <tr> | ||
Latest revision as of 09:55, 21 June 2011
PCD Technical Framework Vol. 2 Errata
No. 1 - Noted by Al Englebert. Entered 2011-06-17.
The following table appears in the current version of Vol. 2. It differs from the HL7 base specification in that the length for NTE-4 is given as 705, which is the general length for CWE fields in HL7 v. 2.6 BUT the corresponding table in the base specification give the length as 250, which is probably a mistake.
In addition, the Technical Framework has field names that are "out of step" with the field attributes fields from NTE-4 on.
This has no operational effect on PCD implementers, since these fields are "X" "Not Implemented", but the erratum will be applied in future TF versions.
Current text
Table B.4-1 NTE - Notes and Comment segment
SEQ |
LEN |
DT |
Usage |
Card. |
TBL# |
ITEM# |
Element name |
1 |
4 |
SI |
R |
[1..1] |
|
00096 |
Set ID – NTE |
2 |
8 |
ID |
X |
[0..0] |
|
00097 |
Source of Comment |
3 |
65536 |
FT |
RE |
[0..1] |
|
00098 |
Comment |
4 |
705 |
CWE |
X |
[0..0] |
|
01318 |
Comment Type |
5 |
3220 |
XCN |
X |
[0..0] |
|
00661 |
Entered Date/Time |
6 |
24 |
DTM |
X |
[0..0] |
|
01004 |
Effective Start Date |
7 |
24 |
DTM |
X |
[0..0] |
|
02185 |
Expiration Date |
Proposed corrected text
Table B.4-1 NTE - Notes and Comment segment
SEQ |
LEN |
DT |
Usage |
Card. |
TBL# |
ITEM# |
Element name |
1 |
4 |
SI |
R |
[1..1] |
|
00096 |
Set ID – NTE |
2 |
8 |
ID |
X |
[0..0] |
|
00097 |
Source of Comment |
3 |
65536 |
FT |
RE |
[0..1] |
|
00098 |
Comment |
4 |
250 |
CWE |
X |
[0..0] |
|
01318 |
Comment Type |
5 |
3220 |
XCN |
X |
[0..0] |
|
00661 |
Entered by |
6 |
24 |
DTM |
X |
[0..0] |
|
01004 |
Entered Date/Time |
7 |
24 |
DTM |
X |
[0..0] |
|
02185 |
Expiration Date |