proofreading-jan2014

Remarks:

#### In credits.html
>The Management board is Lorraine Constable, Jean Duteau, Hugh Glover, David Hay, Lloyd McKenzie, John Moehrke, Brian Pech, John Quinn and Ron Parker

I think this list is outdated

#### In summary.html
(nothing)

#### In overview.html
In Internet Explorer, the paragraph after the image with the tabs does not start on a new line, but renders to the right of the image.

#### In resources.html
Resource definition shows text [1..1], it's [0..1] in the Resource's Excel sheet however. It's because of the fact that contained resources don't have a `<text>` element, but this difference might be worth adding a note on.

#### In conformance-rules.html
(nothing)

#### In extras.html
>Compartments define how particular instances of the compartment are defined and identified

What's an "instance of the compartment"? What does it mean for them to be "defined" or "identified"? I think this bit of text is cryptic.

"As a search related operation", does that mean that you don't do normal reads within a compartment? e.g.

	http://someserver.org/fhir/Patient/1/Patient/1

This may seem pointless, but if this compartimentalization is done implicitly based on the identitity of the user, isn't this what it would look like when done explicitly? Wouldn't it be necessary to make a compartment limit other operations too, so you don't see other resources when doing a server-wide history for example?

#### In narrative.html
cjk-ideographic on `<ol>` does not work under IE 9 and 10. Nothing we can do about that, but that shows it's hard to assure the receiving party sees the same, even with this restricted subset.

#### In compartment-patient.html
(nothing)

#### In references.html
The id/idref text only really makes sense where the reference is between xhtml elements and structured data in the resource. I have moved this text under this specific header, and supplied examples for both the reference in an xhtml element and the reference between an `<img>` and a binary.

#### In datatypes.html#codeableconcept
The text and the invariant refer to the element `primary` which seems to be gone. Maybe the ordering now indicates this?

The following text in `references.html` indeed suggests `primary` does not exist anymore, since it is not listed as one of the possible reference types:

>There are 3 cases where elements inside a resource reference each other:

#### In formats.html
>Some data types that have children have the same set of children as some other element defined in the resource. In that case, the type of that element is represented _as @[path]_ where [path] is the element that has the defined children

I don't think this @[path] is rendered in SpecXml anymore.

>FHIR elements are never empty. If an element is present in the resource, it SHALL have either a value attribute, child elements as defined for its type, an id attribute that is the link target of narrative, or 1 or more extensions

Is `id` sufficient as the sole content for an element? I don't think so, since then there's nothing to refer to. 

Section 1.11.1.1 (conformance-rules.html#Cardinality) says
>Note that when present, elements cannot be empty - they SHALL have either a value attribute, child elements, or extensions. 

which, I think correctly, does not mention id.

#### In xml.html
>To build a valid XML instance of a resource, simply replace the contents of the elements and attributes with valid content as described by the cardinality, type rules and content description found in the comment in each element

Since we use value="" everywhere, this is not true anymore. Also this means:
>Note that the only properties that are represented as attributes are those defined in underlying specifications such as Atom (see below), (...)

Is not true, we use both 'value' and 'id' as attributes in the FHIR serialization (and 'contentType' for Binary, but that's not a true resource).

Maybe the `<nameD>` should be turned into a `<nameD value=''>` to make this clear? (Just in the description of the xml format here, not in the SpecXml).

>There is no implication that the feed is a standing arrangement (though this is not precluded)

No idea what that means.


#### In profile.html
The example for slicing still uses Observation.component element, which does not exist anymore.

#### In extensibility.html
>Each extension is defined using the following fields:

It is not clear how these fields correspond to the actual elements in `Profile.ExtensionDefn`.

>or "Extension: x,y,z" which indicates that the extension codes x,y, and z will be contained in the extension

What does that mean?

#### In extensibility-examples.html

	<Profile xmlns="http://hl7.org/fhir">
  		<name value="iso-21090" />

and later:

	<Patient xmlns="http://hl7.org/fhir">
  		<extension url="http://example.org/phr/documents/fhir/extensions#participation-agreement" >

I think we should chose another name for the profile (this is certainly not part of iso-21090), and change the name in the extension url accordingly.

I think the example under `1.11.6.1.1.5 Adding it to Patient Profile` emphasizes a technical/infrastructural aspect of using extensions (slicing the extension array), and I think is too advanced for most readers.