On 10/12/2010 08:49, Erik Sundvall wrote: > Hi! > > A very interesting discussion, thanks to everybody here! Great with > all references too! > > On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 16:26, pablo pazos <pazospablo at hotmail.com > <mailto:pazospablo at hotmail.com>> wrote: > > Maybe if we change the terminology to GUI Templates and openEHR > Templates, we will not have these problems. > > > Or perhaps "GUI focused templates" and "Structurally focused > templates" (since both will be openEHR based). > Correct me if I'm wrong: > If templates can specialize templates in several generations of > inheritance/specialisation (This is the case, right?), then we could > use the same basic annotation formalism for different purposes in > different layers, only the annotation names would be different. > > So an example inheritance/specialisation hierarchy in a running system > could be: > > A bunch of clinical archetypes (mostly international, and some > regional ones) > ...are used as building blocks in... > > a "structural" template (maybe national/regional) often creating a > composite SECTION or COMPOSITION > > [add more structural layers if useful]
all correct up to here > > ...that is then annotated with GUI-hints by... > a set of "GUI templates" with each template fitting a different > recurring use case not forgetting that GUI is only one place to deploy a template (e.g. messages etc), so there might be some other kind of 'deployment templates' as well. > > ...for a specific GUI, the most fitting of those GUI templates is then > picked and might be further annotated/specialized with yet another > template layer or used directly as input to GUI-generation or > GUI-building tools > > > On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 15:55, Thomas Beale > <thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com > <mailto:thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com>> wrote: > > you have two choices: > > * A) mix it in with the languages & architectural layers you > already have > * B) create a dedicated layer or component type, and possibly > dedicated formalism if needed > > I believe there is (as usual) a context dependent gray-zone, not a > clear breakpoint, regarding what annotations would be most useful to > have in which layer. So, yes I agree layers are good for separation of > concerns, but it is not always (at least not at an early stage) easy > to forsee exactly what best fits into each layer and how many layers > there should be. I agree - we don't yet have a clear list of the GUi semantics that would need to be in a UI template... > > If the already present annotation mechanism in templates is powerful > enough (Do you think it is, Koray, Pablo and others?) to be clear, do you mean the annotations documented in the ADL 1.5 draft document? I.e. the new annotations section? > and if could be reused also for GUI-stuff instead of creating another > different formalism, then we should take a close look at that option > before thinking of specifying another mechanism for GUI-concerns. > You'd still get layers (if you sensibly use specialisation) but more > flexible boundaries during the needed upcoming period of collaborative > experimentation and real use. > > On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 22:06, Koray Atalag <k.atalag at auckland.ac.nz > <mailto:k.atalag at auckland.ac.nz>> wrote: > > I think having these discussions is a great start. But it'd be > great if someone from the core group 'owns' this thread and puts > some pressure on us. > > > Koray, what makes you exclude yourself from the "core group"? > Shouldn't openEHR be a community with peers trying to solve common > problems, where people like you with specific implementation > experience can help collaboratively lead a specific exploration > tangents at least as well as some official "core" that is busy > prioritizing other important explorations. Whatever that "core" is I > believe it will be actively involved in, and appreciate, the discussions. Erik, is right. There is no special 'core group' like in the old days - these days, it is whoever is here. In terms of ADL/AOM 1.5 specs, I will simply take into account any requirements that are clearly enough documented for me to understand... - thomas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20101214/60c3b1b6/attachment.html>
