Hi, While we are at it.
-1- Why do we need a TDD? Isn't a Template just a Composition archetype with Sections archetypes and ENTRY archetypes and Cluster archetypes and Element archetypes plus data types. In addition as many possible degrees of freedom need to be constrained so as to reflect the agreement between the two exchanging actors. In all aspects they rare nothing but an archetype in my part of the world. The peculiar thing about templates is that they are for prime time actual use/deployment. -2- Transformations: The Template (archetype) has node names changed in places (and therefor their meaning). They are more complex in places (because new branches) have been added, less complex in places (because branches are not used), more constrained in places than the pure parent archetype. To write generic transformations is not trivial, I expect. If possible at all. Gerard Freriks +31 620347088 gfrer at luna.nl On 14 jun. 2013, at 09:41, Daniel Karlsson <Daniel.Karlsson at liu.se> wrote: > Hi Ian, > > On Thu, 2013-05-30 at 10:34 +0100, Ian McNicoll wrote: >> Hi Erik, >> >> >> The Ocean TDD->canonical transform is available at >> >> >> http://openehr.codeplex.com/SourceControl/latest#176376 >> >> >> >> look for TDD_to_openEHR.xsl >> >> >> As far as I know a generic reverse transform is not possible. > > How could that be? Is there something in the TDD format that is not in > the RM format? The intuition tells me that it should be easier going > from the rich RM format to the TDD format than in the opposite > direction. What are the specific issues that make a reverse > transformation problematic? Could anything be changed to make the > transformation possible? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20130614/ddeb7b6f/attachment.html>
