so you have to define two different archetype id even if the archetypes are the same? and again, slot text, description and codes are lost with this kind of approach
2012/5/2 Thomas Beale <thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com>: > On 02/05/2012 11:15, Diego Bosc? wrote: >> >> But if you have sibling nodes (see the example above) you will have >> paths that won't be unique as original slot atXXXX is lost > > > Sibling nodes are no problem. Let's say you want to fill them with 2 > archetypes > > openEHR-demographic-PERSON.person_type_A.v1 > openEHR-demographic-PERSON.person_type_B.v1 > > there is no problem. If you want to specialised the archetype > openEHR-demographic-PERSON.person_type_A.v1 into different things, you can > get e.g. > > openEHR-demographic-PERSON.person_type_A1.v1 > openEHR-demographic-PERSON.person_type_A2.v1 > > (the names can be whatever, obviously) > > > - thomas > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
