Yes, I agree with this approach as well. Larry
-----Original Message----- From: Christopher J. Feahr, OD [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2002 8:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: CPP and COB [and companion guides] Rachel, I'm inclined to agree with you. Even if that "electronic CG" is eventually standardized to the point where a provider could auto-configure from it, the provider system would still be able to automatically FIND the "electronic CG" by starting at the Registry. Thanks, Chris At 02:29 PM 7/13/2002 -0500, you wrote: >Chris, just a comment on your following paragraph: > >Regarding scope: Even if the details of auto-configuration belong in >another discussion venue (and I agree)... would you agree that the CPP >record is the logical place for a partner's system to [some day] look for >the auto-config data elements? Or should we just put in a single field >for the URL to the companion guide, and leave it there for now? > >I would not want to see any CPP cluttered up with auto-config data elements. >Where would you end it? Right now we're talking about claims, but what about >other message types. I'd hate to see a CPP become a kitchen sink for >anything to be thrown into, thereby rendering it so complex and to become >unusable. Rather, the CPP should just contain a URL pointer to where one >obtains these details....whether they're a companion doc in X12 syntax or >something in the future based on XML schema or some other syntax yet to be >devised. > >I think it's imperative that at the outset we keep things very simple and >uncluttered in order to satisfy some basic requirements and and only add >complexity when the business need and requirements are determined. Trying to >come up with that perfect all-encompassing CPP isn't realistic nor >achievable, in any timeframe. It's much more important to get something >simple that can be used quickly so the industry can either see the >benefit/value or not and then grow it as needed. > >Rachel >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 > > > >discussions on this listserv therefore represent the views of the individual >participants, and do not necessarily represent the views of the WEDI Board of >Directors nor WEDI SNIP. If you wish to receive an official opinion, post >your question to the WEDI SNIP Issues Database at >http://snip.wedi.org/tracking/. >Posting of advertisements or other commercial use of this listserv is >specifically prohibited. Christopher J. Feahr, OD http://visiondatastandard.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell/Pager: 707-529-2268 discussions on this listserv therefore represent the views of the individual participants, and do not necessarily represent the views of the WEDI Board of Directors nor WEDI SNIP. If you wish to receive an official opinion, post your question to the WEDI SNIP Issues Database at http://snip.wedi.org/tracking/. Posting of advertisements or other commercial use of this listserv is specifically prohibited. discussions on this listserv therefore represent the views of the individual participants, and do not necessarily represent the views of the WEDI Board of Directors nor WEDI SNIP. If you wish to receive an official opinion, post your question to the WEDI SNIP Issues Database at http://snip.wedi.org/tracking/. Posting of advertisements or other commercial use of this listserv is specifically prohibited.
