Do we need to get ready for R5?

[bdc-ehealth]

Some of our stakeholders express (implicitly) their wish to use R5 features (hl7-be/allergy#86). Do we need to prepare for this?

[costateixeira]

The request is to have different codes and what we should do now about it. And there is a defined option for now: we add extensions. What new feature is there? We should all prepare for the future releases, which is why we have agreed to use logical data models. But I see no link between the interpretation of the allergy issue and the need to consider R5. Suggest starting the discussion with a broader scope.

…

On Thu, 15 Dec 2022, 09:08 Bart Decuypere (eHealth), < ***@***.***> wrote: Some of our stakeholders express (implicitly) their wish to use R5 features (hl7-be/allergy#86 <hl7-be/allergy#86>). Do we need to prepare for this? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#40>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AD3HUUA3VDOM75QU3QFB6R3WNLN2VANCNFSM6AAAAAAS7PH55M> . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[annabel-uzl]

hl7-be/core-clinical#32 --> in this tread we discussed adding an extension to the procedure for SupportingInfo (an element that is already available in R5).
What is the reasoning behind not switching to R5 instead of providing extensions? What are main reasons to decide to switch (or not to switch) to a new version?