Dear all, My ideas: - unique identifiers are numbers that are unique. - each collection of information that has an attribute with this unique number can be collected and presented as belonging together, - with one unique identifier per (pseudo)identity all information belonging to this unique identifier can be collected and presented as belonging together - this type of use is identifying documents (or parts of it) as containing information about the same person with a specific identity.
- it is NO PROOF of the real identity of the person. That is a different matter. - When we have to uniquely identify persons we need other things than numbers. - Unique numbers must not be trusted. - Unique numbers that identify persons generate problems: identity theft. - Only knowledge that is known by the person, or features his body posesses, will help to identify persons. Gerard -- <private> -- Gerard Freriks, arts Huigsloterdijk 378 2158 LR Buitenkaag The Netherlands +31 252 544896 +31 654 792800 On 20 Apr 2005, at 12:43, Bert Verhees wrote: > Dear Grahame, > > For example the CEN GPIC subjectofcare which has a property id > The type is a Set of II > The use is excplained as: > "An identifier or identifiers that may be used to uniquely identify the > subject of care. > Examples: social security number, health service number, hospital > number, case notes number" > > Please indicate where there is a mismatch between the intention and the > use of II. > > CENTC251 could learn from that. It would be a great benefit to the > standard if this would be sorted out. > And if it will, then the need for an extra qualifier to tell which the > type of identifier is presented, may disappear, depending on your > solution > > Kind regards > Bert Verhees -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 1829 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20050426/14704952/attachment.bin>
