Identify maintaining authority
Neither namespaces nor modules can currently be used to identify “Maintaining authorities” for SNOMED content.
Is there a use case that makes this a problem, or is there never any value in having this information?
Comments
I don't actually see that this is a major problem from a user perspective - if you have a problem with the content, report it to who you got it from. Ultimately that will come back to the IHTSDO or one of the Members or extensions builders who will be able to determine what to do next about the content. So practically speaking I don't think that's an issue.
Perhaps this is a silly question, but why can't you use the module identifier to determine who is maintaining the content? For example
if content is authored in the Australian Extension it is authored on a module that is a descendant of 32570231000036109 | Australian maintained module http://ontoserver.csiro.au/shrimp/?concept=32570231000036109&versionId=http%3A%2F%2Fsnomed.info%2Fsct%2F32506021000036107%2Fversion%2F20160331
if that content is "promoted" to the international release it keeps its identifiers (well, most of them, and that's a point of contention and much frustration that it isn't all of them) and hence namespace, however the module changes to one of the modules that is a descendant of 900000000000445007 | IHTSDO maintained module
To me that seems like the module very much tells you who the maintaining authority for SNOMED CT content is, and the namespace tells you who the originating source was.
We could potentially use the same Module hierarchy as discussed in the Modularisation discussion - have a parent module related to the relevant country, and then child modules underneath these accordingly. Can then trace them back in the taxonomy in the browser.
From a user perspective, you would always like be able to report a (potential) error in a component. If it is unclear who is responsible for a specific component that might be complicated.