Why isn’t it a good idea? Give an example, svp.
Gerard Freriks +31 620347088 gf...@luna.nl Kattensingel 20 2801 CA Gouda the Netherlands > On 10 Nov 2017, at 14:21, Boštjan Lah <bostjan....@marand.si> wrote: > > > >> On 10 Nov 2017, at 14:19, Thomas Beale <thomas.be...@openehr.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 10/11/2017 10:24, GF wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Even when elements make no sense when both are recorded, even then 1..1 is >>> a problem in Archetypes. >>> It is up to the implementer to decide to restrict 0..n further in the >>> Template. >> >> you can't restrict from 1..1 => 0..* in a template - it's not allowed in any >> restriction algebra, of which ADL is an example. >> >> If it is thought that no occurrnces constraint might be needed in any >> derivative archetype or template, the original parent should have 0..1 or >> 0..* as appropriate. > Yes, but I think making all archetypes generic like Gerard suggests is not a > good idea. > > Bostjan
_______________________________________________ openEHR-clinical mailing list openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org
