> Syntax independent - MCIs - Messages > Details
|
Message Content Inventory |
Identifier : DPTDAMDOD030 - - (Claimant - Damage - Damaged object - données personne (individu))-
- Approved
, and is part of release 201501
- ( UN/Edifact : added info ) - (UN/Edifact MIG : Fr / Nl ) - (XML/JSON : added info ) |
Sender :
Receiver :
Status : 2 - Version : 1
|
Seq. n° | n u d (*) |
Data element | Code list |
Usage Mandatory Conditional Optional (**) |
Condition(s) |
||
Indicator |
Identifier |
Version |
|||||
10 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person (injured individual)
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Mand.
|
||
20 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - object instance identifier
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
30 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - object instance name
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
40 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Type d'affiliation à la mutuelle
|
Yes
|
1
|
Option.
|
|||
50 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Injured individual -
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Mand.
|
||
60 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Injured individual - Identifier at insurer
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
70 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Injured individual - Identifier at intermediary
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
80 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Injured individual - Type d'affiliation à la mutuelle
|
Yes
|
1
|
Option.
|
|||
90 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Injured individual - Pourcentage d'invalidité permanente
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
100 | u |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Treating medical doctor
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
|
110 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Treating medical doctor - Identifier at insurer
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
120 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Treating medical doctor - Identifier at intermediary
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
130 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Treating medical doctor - Official name
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
140 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Treating medical doctor - Address
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
150 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Treating medical doctor - Telephone
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
160 | u |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Hospital
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
|
170 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Hospital - Identifier at insurer
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
180 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Hospital - Identifier at intermediary
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
190 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Hospital - Official name
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
200 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Hospital - Address
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
210 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Hospital - Telephone
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
220 | u |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Certifying medical doctor
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
|
230 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Certifying medical doctor - Identifier at insurer
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
240 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Certifying medical doctor - Identifier at intermediary
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
250 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Certifying medical doctor - Official name
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
260 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Certifying medical doctor - Address
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
270 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Certifying medical doctor - Examination date
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
280 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Certifying medical doctor - Report sent date
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
290 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Certifying medical doctor - Telephone
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
||
300 |
Claimant - Damage - Damaged person - Certifying medical doctor - Communication text
|
No
|
-
|
-
|
Option.
|
(*) n u d : new / updated / deleted since previous version.
(*bis) u : updated : this can be a codelist-version incrementing.
Note that in many, not to say all such cases, the user-community does not await such next release to implement/activate such new codelist-values.
The reasoning is that such added value does not affect the current data-structures and hence is considered easely implementable.
Such reasoning tends to forget how given new codelist-values might not simply affect the data, but also affect the process, which might be more of a problem...
(**) Usage: The indications Mandatory / Conditional / Optional are to be understood in respect of the actual level of the Data element:
example given; some party data-set as a whole can be optional, while, if present, the party's name within that party data-set can be mandatory.
Remark: in UN/Edifact, "Mandatory / Conditional" are notions used within the standard.
And within edi-guides (a refinement of a standard) the "Conditional" can become "Required / Optional / Dependent / Advised / Not used".
Ideally we should implement the same ideas.