Re: CPP Data elements draft for comment

2002-05-05 Thread Michael Mattias/Tal Systems
- Original Message - From: Christopher J. Feahr, OD [EMAIL PROTECTED] Here's the link to my proposed CPP template/spreadsheet. (thanks, William): http://www.novannet.com/wedi/CPP_Elements.xls You may want to hold off on commenting until you have seen a similar CPP template proposal

Re: CPP Data elements draft for comment

2002-05-05 Thread William J. Kammerer
Michael: Thanks for your input. Any good technical junk regarding Healthcare Partner profiles (CPP) and Registries is welcome for discussion on the list. I have heard comments from some folks that there's just too much e-mail on this list, but I figure there can't be enough discussion of

Re: our section of the paper wrt. ProcessSpecification/Role/ServiceBinding/Service

2002-05-05 Thread William J. Kammerer
Dick: Unfortunately, in a message centric system like the HIPAA standard transactions, there's really no Business Process evident at the interchange or transaction set level. See the thread entitled Requirements Gathering - Information Flows, especially my messages from 02-16 and 03-01, at

RE: CPP Data elements draft for comment

2002-05-05 Thread Dick Brooks
Joe McVerry wrote: Should public encryption keys be available in this template? IMO, yes. Along with other items needed to enable E-Commerce (e.g. self signed certificates for SSL, public keys for encryption, public keys for digital signature verification, Certificate Revocation List

Re: Minneapolis X12 Meeting and Appointment of Working Paper Editor

2002-05-05 Thread William J. Kammerer
I made a boo-boo. My enthusiasm for our ID Routing project got a little ahead of me on Friday, when I announced a forum for discussions at the June X12 meeting in Minneapolis. As way of background, Peter Barry and I have been looking for possible ANSI ASC X12 subcommittee sponsors of a

RE: CPP Data elements draft for comment

2002-05-05 Thread Ajay K sanghi
Michael Mattias wrote: snip (A DOCUMENT section in addition to CONNECTION would be just fine). snip It's absolutely necessary and many fields (18-27) in RECEIVER section needs to be generic and moved to DOCUMENT section (line items type). For example, Fields - Transaction Name, Version,