Chris, The X12 transaction is the 838 Trading Partner Profile.
I don't know that it informed any of the work that resulted in the ebXML CPP/CPA specification. The foundation for this was the work donated to the ebXML effort by IBM. CPP/CPA is **NOT** about a registry at all. There is a separate ebXML specification for the registry/repository portion of the ebXML architecture. The CPP/CPA is all about the rules of electronic engagement between two trading partners, with the CPP describing what you are capable of doing and the CPA being an "agreement" between two entities regarding what they **will** do. Chris, it's very important that you get the most current specs (draft) on the CPP/A specification to see what it specifies. I fear (no pun intended!) that you may be moving way off into left field where you may not want to be....perhaps yet. Let's get the core of the CPP done first. Rachel Foerster Principal Rachel Foerster & Associates, Ltd. Professionals in EDI & Electronic Commerce 39432 North Avenue Beach Park, IL 60099 Phone: 847-872-8070 Fax: 847-872-6860 http://www.rfa-edi.com -----Original Message----- From: Christopher J. Feahr, OD [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 1:30 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Rishel,Wes; William J. Kammerer Subject: Data Elements for the WEDI-SNIP-CPP All right, then... As I recall, Dick Brooks was looking at the X12 transaction used for describing preferred addressing and connection protocols for other transactions (I can't recall the X12 transaction # but it was apparently used by OASIS as a template for much of the CPP structure). Anyway... has someone extracted a list of data elements from that transaction? If so, that would be a good start on the basic connection elements. Rachel, do you know if the CPP specification is entirely about the registry *structure*, or has the OASIS group actually enumerated minimum/required data elements for the CPP record? My assumption is that each "industry" using the CPP would have an industry-specific, standard library of XML tags defined for the CPP elements that people are most often interested in. This is the part I was curious to know whether it had been discussed at the level of OASIS's UBL Liaison Committee. Kepa, could you provide us with a "brain dump" of what your were thinking about for the "HIPAA-readiness and certification" data elements? At a minimum, I would think that we would need a Y/N element for each HIPAA transaction with regard to whether the entity is "ready to test" and/or "ready to go live". Maybe we want fields to indicate level of testing passed for each transaction... who the certifying agency was, type of test data used, etc. TANGENTIAL ISSUE: Kepa, have you decided to group or specialize your test/sample data by general area of healthcare... as it relates to this ADMINISTRATIVE consideration? If so, we might want to include the general type of test data the CE used to obtain its certification. For example, if we ever get our eyewear/vision code set, optometrists will want to know that sending in a claim with the new vision codes will not make the receiving system puke. I'm not sure we even have a suitable standard breakdown of the industry into "segments with similar claim and eligibility data requirements" (like "vision", "ambulance", "anesthesia", "in-patient surgical", etc.). It feels like the taxonomy breakdown, but probably doesn't have to be as granular. Maybe a subgrouping of the standard taxonomy codes would do the trick, but since taxonomy is primarily organized around the practice of medicine, it may not map exactly to areas of special transaction handling, special code-sets, etc. I will volunteer to organize all prospective CPP data elements into a spreadsheet/wish-list... then you can all attack it with your virtual machetes! -Chris At 01:28 PM 4/20/02 -0400, William J. Kammerer wrote: >Yes, definitely, I think we should "... jump right into the enumeration >of the data elements now." - in effect, that might be a way of getting >requirements into the open when you see what it entails. Can we take >your discussion and musings onto the Routing listserve? > >William J. Kammerer >Novannet, LLC. Christopher J. Feahr, OD http://visiondatastandard.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell/Pager: 707-529-2268
