Introducing SNOMED to a FHIR audience and FHIR to a SNOMED Audience!Explanation of 4 levels of binding.
Code, Coding, Codeable Concept as specific to SNOMED CT (include link to introduction and points about display terms & multiple languages).
What is the scope of content for the guide? Targeting "Best Practice" for FHIR Implementers using SNOMED CT. Possible layered approach and potentially strict (for internal record keeping and communication) vs permissive profiles when . General guidance for bindings or specific details on each resource.
Audiences - Developer vs User of implemented services. ML Suggests single entry point document with multiple paths through the documentation.
4 June - group agreed to target R4 in the first instance but to indicate any future changes inline. Also (PJ) suggested section on major changes from STU3 to R4 where relevant to SNOMED eg $compose is now $find-matches
2 July - PJ: question over specific content for different stakeholders (FHIR spec does this) and how we present that - separate pages for developers (details) vs architect (integration, general 'use' of terminology services eg off the shelf solution. Why use the FHIR API at all?) vs business level?
16 July - PJ suggested initial page to target specific stakeholders (jumping off pages). Compare with FHIR "Getting Started" Page - "see the Overviews: General, Developers, Clinical, and Architects"
ML suggestion that we introduce SNOMED "through the lens of FHIR", so stay away from language reference sets and stick with what can be seen directly from FHIR resources. (But we can have links to the detail & implementation course - PJ)