#123: Motion to find persuasive Kathy, Freida, no further discussion, against: 0, abstain: 0, in favor: 6 Also related are #5, #44 and #75 #126: Motion to find persuasive, Kathy, Freida, no further discussion, against: 0, abstain: 0, in favor: 16 #107: step 4 and 6 are not listing the ACK messages it seems the items listed here are that are specific – for the scenario described at the specific step to rename to Messages –Motion “requirements “ “Main and Key Data” - for step 4 to use ACK^O21^ACK and 6 to use ACK^^O22ACK message type and MSA-2 (Message Control ID) matches MSH-10 (Message Control ID) of the message the ACK is for. Hans, Bob Y, further discussion: does this mean we are making changes to the other tables? For sure the column name - the content we will address separately, against: 0, abstain: 0, in favor: 6 #190 NEG from Ruth; We think the reference should go to 4.4 ORL need to review both paragraphs – – as they are cited in #153 need to look at original spreadsheet to find out – #153 is same location as A_S from Craig, If the LIS creates the cancel it is NOT a cancel as requested it is an OML, while if it is responding to the placer requesting a cancel an ORL message with cancel as requested is sent hold till we get David on, – too On Thursday will look at PHER items in LRI
#123: Motion to find persuasive Kathy, Freida, no further discussion, against: 0, abstain: 0, in favor: 6 Also related are #5, #44 and #75 #126: Motion to find persuasive, Kathy, Freida, no further discussion, against: 0, abstain: 0, in favor: 16 #107: step 4 and 6 are not listing the ACK messages – it seems the items listed here are that are specific for the scenario described at the specific step –Motion to rename “requirements “ to “Main Messages and Key Data” - for step 4 to use ACK^O21^ACK and 6 to use ACK^^O22ACK message type and MSA-2 (Message Control ID) matches MSH-10 (Message Control ID) of the message the ACK is for. Hans, Bob Y, further discussion: does this mean we are making changes to the other tables? For sure the column name - the content we will address separately, against: 0, abstain: 0, in favor: 6 #190 – NEG from Ruth; We think the reference should go to 4.4 ORL – need to review both paragraphs as they are cited in #153 – need to look at original spreadsheet to find out #153 is same location as A_S from Craig, If the LIS creates the cancel it is NOT a cancel as requested it is an OML, while if it is responding to the placer requesting a cancel an ORL message with cancel as requested is sent – hold till we get David on, too On Thursday will look at PHER items in LRI
20170124_LOI_Notes.docx