Ed, that's the whole problem with these standards committees: they are full of people whose competence is not modelling or engineering, and who don't see the downstream consequences of their choices, and in any case, the 'democratic' committee process largely prevents proper design occurring. People just object to whatever, country X demands that a certain attribute be renamed... it just comes down to who came on the day and who shouts loudest.
I came to HL7 meetings for 5 or 6 years, and followed all the required process (well, except the shouting down in meetings, sorry I am not into that), and it had no effect. I know many many people who have said the same thing, including people in key positions in e-health programmes around the world. - thomas On 25/11/2010 17:26, William E Hammond wrote: > OK. I accept the comment. However, the problem I have is that many of the > comments are a matter of opinion - that's ok, but it is not a right or > wrong. If the issues were balloted, by shere numbers HL7 would come out > ahead. The comment of attributes in quotes and the comment incorrectly > named does not make your point. > > If you want HL7 to respond to your critiques, sedn them to the TSC or HL7 > leadership. > * * -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20101125/6de77e2a/attachment.html>
