Hi William Thanks for the kind words. It seems to me that we could define a mapping from openehr to iso 21090. I certainly designed it that way. The mapping is not perfect, but it's good enough to be useful except for corner cases. I just have to find the time to write it up properly, but that seems an increasingly distant prospect at the moment.
Grahame Sent from my iPhone On 19/11/2010, at 6:49 PM, Williamtfgoossen at cs.com wrote: > Hi all, > > Given this discussion on ISO 21090 I would like to bring forward the > following: > > 1. Every international standard is and has to be based on political > decisions: all member countries have to be accepting it and hence will want > to get something specific out of it, or block too difficult parts. > That is the way of standards making, in contrary to what a group of friends > like in OpenEHR foundation can do. This has nothing to do with committees > working in the implementation space or sitting at a table. It is how formal > democratic voting goes. Not a perfect system we know, but apparently chosen > above totalitarian approaches. > This democratic development (inclusive of all parties concerned, and voting > by members) has been and is still the case for ISO 21090. > The same democratic and transparant voting procedure by members is used in > HL7 international (of course the membership is organised different from ISO). > > 2. The use cases for ISO 21090 do come from different sources: an older basic > data type standard from ISO, clinical use cases, CEN standards, in particular > the one on archetypes (13606-2), AND HL7 among others. The resulting set is > accepted by the ISO membership, and indeed the HL7 membership, referring to > it as datatypes R2 (and facing an enourmous piece of effort and work to redo > a lot of the models and messages due to the harmonisation). And under the > JIC, also the CDISC organisation deals with this since ISO 21090 is part of > the joint harmonisation work. I think the willingness of the different JIC > partners to step beyond their traditional route and harmonise this formidable > and fundamental work is the most important achievement in the last 25 years > of international standards work. I would like to compliment Grahame in > particular that he managed to get a useful, albeit say 96% "perfect" standard > out of this. > > 3. No standard or specification can be perfect. In particular, Tom's work > might be closer to perfection than the ISO 21090, but that is hypothetically > a matter of a percentage between 96% and 97.5% on a VAS of 0 - 100%. I > personally are pragmatic, I need in Detailed Clinical Models and in HL7 v3 > Care Provision message implementations about 20 - 30% of the ISO 21090, so do > not bother about the rare use cases addressed. > > 4. Core principle behind the standard is that you create a profile around it > that allows you to implement it in your system, or your message, or your > datawarehouse or whatever. There is usually no way to have it 100% ready for > use. The example from the blog that Tom talks about, where ISO 21090 is > mapped into their own CDISC models is almost perfect. That is the way to go. > Yes it will include mappings from ISO time format to XML time format. But if > that works well on implementation, at the exchange level you are compliant. > > 5. If you adhere to ISO 21090 / conform to it / there is always the option to > limit your implementation set. E.g. refer to particular chapters or codes in > ISO 21090. > > 6. It looks from Tom's objections that OpenEHR cannot adhere to data type > standard ISO 21090. Is that a problem in the OpenEHR specifications, or is > that a problem on political level: we do want to invent our own because it is > closer to perfection? What I mean here is: if I create archetypes in OpenEHR > spaces (there are about 25 in Dutch available pending other issues to be > solved before releasing). And from this system I need to exchange HL7 v3 > messages in the Dutch national switshboard space, will I be in trouble > because the OpenEHR archetypes cannot handle even the basic ISO 21090 > datatypes? > > > > > > Met vriendelijke groet, > > Results 4 Care b.v. > > dr. William TF Goossen > directeur > > De Stinse 15 > 3823 VM Amersfoort > email: wgoossen at results4care.nl > telefoon +31 (0)654614458 > > fax +31 (0)33 2570169 > Kamer van Koophandel nummer: 32133713 > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20101119/9818fa94/attachment.html>
