Hi All I would suggest that we have a very strong backwardly compatible notion on each reference model and do not do anything that would invalidate current archetypes in RM 1.x
This would mean that we only had to record the highest level version that an archetype was compatible with in the archetype RM 1.0 and leave it at that. I am sure people working in the environment would like such an approach. It means we have two rules: All archetypes of the same version are compatible semantically All archetypes work with the reference model version (1,2 etc) and go on being compatible. Cheers, Sam > -----Original Message----- > From: openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org [mailto:openehr-technical- > bounces at openehr.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Beale > Sent: Tuesday, 3 February 2009 11:53 PM > To: For openEHR technical discussions > Subject: Re: RM Versions > > Tim Cook wrote: > > On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 13:29 +0000, Thomas Beale wrote: > > > >> I meant to add: however, we should still raise a PR in openEHR Jira > to > >> describe the problem of knowing the compatibility of archetypes with > >> respect to a given reference model. Tim - do you want to do this? > >> > > > > Yes. I'll do this in the coming days. I am thinking that it would > be > > a List attribute like: > > > > rm_versions=['1.0.1','1.0.2'] > > > > That is what I would expect, or it may be from-version to-version > > > That way the software can simply say is; my_rm_version in > rm_versions. > > > > The question is who validates the archetypes against each rm_version; > > the original author? > > > > well it has to be tool driven, and the thing is that the answer will > clearly change over time, e.g. when Release 1.1 is published, some > archetypes, but not all, will have their compatibility updated from > > ['1.0','1.0.2'] > > to > > ['1.0','1.1'] > > I suppose it is conceivable that there could be incompatibilities in > intervening minor versions that disappear later on, if so, the list > representation would be needed. > > I would say it needs to be constantly evaluated in an archetype > service, > probably based on meta-data supplied from CKM or similar places. > > - thomas > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
