For questions about this archive, please contact webmaster@hl7.org.
Rene Spronk (Feb 02 2019 at 08:34):Recently one of my HL7 Netherlands colleagues mentioned that the StrucDoc committee (during the recent HL7 WGM) made a statement that a document being DRIV (text derived from structured content) was an exception to the rule, and that COMP (text is richer semantically than the underlying structures, if there are such structures).
I'm somewhat surprised by this, most European implementations of CDA are 100% DRIV (the only COMP document I know is a textual Pathology report). Looking at a guide like CCDA or the IHE CDA specs with highly structured templates, one would assume those to be 100% DRIV as well. epSOS, Trillium Bridge etc: 100% DRIV.
So I'm a bit curious as to why a group of (mainly US) CDA experts would claim most implementations to be COMP rather than DRIV. What's the reason for making such a statement?
Last updated: Mar 23 2020 at 00:02 UTC