Re: [urn] Request for a Namespace Registration for Unique (Vaccination) Certificate Identifier

[Peter Saint-Andre <[e-mail]>]

On 8/11/21 5:25 AM, Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
> On 11 Aug 2021, at 01:07, Peter Saint-Andre <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> On 8/1/21 7:37 AM, Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
> 
>>> For this reason the design[2] calls for a Unique (Vaccination) 
>>> Certificate Identifier (UVCI) that uniquely identifies a specific test, 
>>> vaccination or recovery certificate. 
> ...
>> However, the foregoing paragraph seems to indicate that a URN would
>> identify a test, vaccination, or recovery certificate. That could be
> ....
>> administered, etc.) - that is, not one URN per person encapsulating
>> numerous events in an array or what have you. That also doesn't seem
>> quite consistent with this later paragraph:
>>
>>> The UVCI pertains to a specific (medical) record about a specific 
>>> person’s vaccination, test or recovery at event level [1,2]. This 
>>> record is subject to national legislation and regulation.
>>
>> Could you clarify this aspect?
> 
> You are correct - this is wrong and badly written. 
> 
> It is an identifier  for a specific assertion (e.g. this person was 
> vaccinated; this  person was tested) rather than something tied to 
> the person; it is inside the elements of arrays of such assertions
>  about 'a' vaccination, test or recovery statement*.
> 
> We've tried to clarify this in the next version of the draft.

Thanks for the clarifications.

As I understand it, the URN identifies a vaccination event, a test
event, or a recovery event. The URN itself does not associate the
assertion with a particular person (there is no "person" construct built
into the URN). For instance, if I get a test, that test is assigned a
URN. If I receive documentation (physical or digital) of the URN that's
been assigned and I present such documentation, the assocation comes
from the fact that I'm the one presenting the documentation. Some other
system (say, a medical records system) could formally associate that URN
with some other identifier for me as a person within a given nation or
region, but that kind of association is out of scope for the URN definition.

If this is correct, I think we could slightly adjust the wording to make
it fully clear.

Peter