I understand Thomas, just some arguments make me smile, like this one:
"alive equals not-dead"
I am glad I am just a programmer. ;-)
On 05-01-16 21:27, Thomas Beale wrote:
Most of these are 'ontological' discussions, i.e. discussions about
all the weird things that could possibly happen in reality. We need to
remember that we are not generally trying to model all that
complexity, but just the general structures for what needs to be
written down at specific points in time by admin and / or clinical
staff. Those 'notes' need to be designed generically enough that they
will cope with all these variations. Making most of the data items
optional is a basic way to do some of that...
- thomas
On 05/01/2016 15:39, Bert Verhees wrote:
My two cents.
Kafka would have loved this discussion, but he is dead.
I think dead is a state, not an event with a date. Dying is an event.
Even when you don't know the date of dying, there can be proof a
person is dead.
And even when there is no proof of a person being dead, there is law
that says that a person can be declared dead, even when there is no
proof, even when there is no date of dying known.
This happens sometimes with missing persons, missing in a fire,
missing at sea, missing in the wild, etc.
Bert
_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org
_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org
