Dear Tom: You write OIDS: "I have never seen a convincing argument for their use."
In the case of the Austrian EHR (www.elga.gv.at) OIDs are used to enforce authenticy as part of the "forensic" issues. Everything (organisations, codelists, guidelines, numbering systems, single patient IDs, really every entity that appears in the Austrian EHR) is tracable via its OID. As you correctly say, an online tool is therefore necessary. In Austria this has gone operative last year and here it is: https://www.gesundheit.gv.at/OID_Frontend/ It has a tree view (among others) and enables everybody to trace every entity back to the origin. The use of OIDs does not dictate that the OID of every entity is actually registered in the central OID server. The OID server keeps track of the root OIDs. Organisations put leaves to the tree as needed in many cases. The agreement in Austria was that full-scale identification of "everything in the EHR" is indeed a core requirement. This is satisfied by OIDs in Austria. Hope this helps, greetings, Stefan On 07.12.2012 18:18, Thomas Beale wrote: > On 07/12/2012 12:14, Stefan Sauermann wrote: >> Dear Ian, >> OIDs are a requirement in some legislations, including the Austrian >> EHR space. >> Can you please explain why they "become a nightmare"? I am sure they >> can, but I would like to hear your exact view. >> >> I understand the OID is not the only "name" of the archetype, just >> one of the unique means of identification. On top of that you can of >> course keep any naming / file / structuring / keywording / etc >> measures in place as you need them, so that you can find your way on >> the PC and elsewhere. > > Hi Stefan, > > We can support them, but Uids and domain names are far more usable. > Oids can't be read by humans, and require online tools for resolution. > I have never seen a convincing argument for their use. if you want to > identify an organisation, there is a domain name, that's pretty much > guaranteed these days, and all the rules are known. The ids are > computable and human readable. Perfect. > > If you want to identify an artefact or concept, Uids or some shorter > code like Snomed ids work fine Uids can be generated and require no > central infrastructure. > > Obviously we would not prevent people putting Oids that they obtain > into sensible places in openEHR (Oids are of course part of the id > package), but I still really struggle to see their actual value. I > certainly would not want to make any part of openEHR actually > dependent upon them. > > - thomas > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-clinical mailing list > openEHR-clinical at lists.openehr.org > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org >
