R4 Appointment updates

[amcginn]

Description

Update the R4 Appointment resource for consistency and readability.

PR Checklist

• Screenshot(s) of changes attached before changes merged.
• Screenshot(s) of changes attached after changes merged and published.

Changes

Overview
before:

after:

Fields
before:

after:

disclaimer and errors sentence were moved here and removed from each example

Search parameters
before:

after (reordered, put field names as code, updated examples):

Search notes
before:

after:

Patch status
before:

after:

Patch video visit fields (common change on all fields)
before:

after:

[kckeim]

I'm annoyed on your behalf, @amcginn, that you had to correct so much poor grammar.
You caught all the ones that rubbed me the wrong way, and then some - it makes a lot more sense now.
Looks like you caught all the bad links too.

I'm marking as approved, but I do have a couple points of commentary to make sure we're being consistent with what our pages are supposed to look like (at least going forward).

---

I don't know if we want to keep the disclaimer following all responses as a self-protective step, or switch to what you did with the one disclaimer section towards the top. It certainly cuts down on the extra page space, but all of our other pages seems to have the disclaimers on there repeatedly. Do you want to make a call either way, or decide as a group, so we can be consistent?

---

Do we want to call out the specific read / write scopes that are referenced in the PATCH section's Implementation notes on line 179 of your corrected appointment.md file?
This'd be something like Appointment.read and Appointment.create unless we want to keep the scopes non-specific - what's your opinion here?

[amcginn]

@kckeim

I don't know if we want to keep the disclaimer following all responses as a self-protective step, or switch to what you did with the one disclaimer section towards the top. It certainly cuts down on the extra page space, but all of our other pages seems to have the disclaimers on there repeatedly. Do you want to make a call either way, or decide as a group, so we can be consistent?

I thought we talked about this in scrum on the 22nd before I was out. Though, now I'm not sure you were there. It may have just been a missed communication on my part.

Do we want to call out the specific read / write scopes that are referenced in the PATCH section's Implementation notes on line 179 of your corrected appointment.md file? This'd be something like Appointment.read and Appointment.create unless we want to keep the scopes non-specific - what's your opinion here?

I like that. We should be definitely be specific where it's easy to do so.

[amcginn]

Updated to specify scopes explicitly.

[Surya-Rnsit]

After Code Deployment: