Hi Rong (All),
(I hope that this is the right mailing list) I am part of an Irish project called EHRland which is looking at two-level models for e-health and trying to understand the openEHR architecture as well. I myself am looking at correspondences between archetype nodes and clinical terms. However I encountered some problems when parsing the ADL files which I took from the openEHR svn repository using the Java ADL parser. The errors messages indicate that they are caused by empty "purpose" and "original author" properties. Sometimes the parser also complains about the 'any' constraint on a single attribute and the parsing is interrupted. In any case, I have a few related questions: 1) Can you provide guidance for working around these errors? NOTE: I assume that you have discontinued the development of those ADL files in the http://www.openehr.org/svn/knowledge/archetypes/ repository and now only use the CKM. I would nevertheless like to use this older set of archetypes, as it contains more archetypes with term bindings than the current CKM set. 2) Another question is in relation to templates. If a significant number of term bindings happen at the template rather than Archetype level, are term bindings in Archetypes optional and open to further constraint even after an archetype is released in CKM? 3) Does anyone have a set of developed templates derived from available archetypes (in any format) with bindings in them? I would like to use them to supplement bindings from archetypes. 4) In your experience, where are bindings generally positioned in an archetype or template? Is this ONLY decided by terminologists or will there also be style guide / principles to (for instance) constrain the possible position of bindings? regards, Sheng This message has been scanned for content and viruses by the DIT Information Services E-Mail Scanning Service, and is believed to be clean. http://www.dit.ie
