Michael,
Thanks.
We are looking at multiple versions from 2.1 through 2.4 of HL/7 to be affected and the provider fields are CN Data Types for 2.1 and 2.2 and XCN Data Type for 2.3 and beyond.
Both constructs allow for a repeating field (just as you experienced in the PRA field) but the XCN has a component for identifying the type of ID (so we could have UPIN or NPI in the appropriate occurrence).
The CN Data Type, however, does not have such a construct. So what I am proposing is the 2.1 messages have certain repetitions associated with certain ID Types (such as the first repetition is the UPIN, etc.).
I dislike determining data intelligence from relative position and so the XCN construct is nice. But, we don’t have much choice with the CN Data Type.
There are others here, however, who have a very distorted idea of how to resolve the challenge.
Thanks again – your example provided me with a much needed sanity check.
Jim Kosloskey
email: jim.kosloskey@jim-kosloskey.com 29+ years Cloverleaf, 59 years IT - old fart.