Buried in this HIStalk post from CIO Ed was the following:
One provocative development in the "battle" between the Continuity of Care Record (ASTM) and EHR (HL7). Some will say that the CCR can be a stepping stone towards an EHR and there are many strengths to the CCR concept. Others say that the CCR will be divisive and distract full adoption of the EHR. Lots of pros and cons that must be seriously considered.
Competing standards organizations ... competing standards. Check this from a year ago. (I've not been immersed in this process and don't yet know what the inner dynamics or the latest stories are.)
As I understand the CCR, it's not supposed to be the entire record itself, but the essential elements that can be passed across organizational boundaries. (I'm less familiar with HL7.) Say for example, a patient was in a hospital ICU last year. Whether atoms or bits, the volume of hospital data on that patient is immense. Now say the patient is seeing a physician for a routine visit. Does the physician need all of that hospital data? Not likely. They need to know the patient was hospitalized, was in the ICU, certain essential elements and how to get more data if necessary. So the CCR concept makes sense for interoperability, moving patient-centric information across space, time, and organizational boundaries.
ASTM has been voting on the latest version of the CCR standard. There was enough dissent that they're going to continue thrashing out the issues rather than count it as an accepted standard.
Yes, these stumbles are frustrating. But they're part of a long, hard, often tedious process that is essential to make progress.