Thanks, Peter, I must have missed the discussion before, and I checked a bit the discussion of December 2012. It was not like I had it in my mind, it was more about the way to avoid archetypeId-clashes then about the archetypeId-clashes itself, as I yesterday suggested.
However, in the wiki you link to is first time a ID-system described after the discussion in 2012, but the messages from 2011 and 2009 indicate that the problem was identified before the discussion in 2012, and I was wrong in thinking that I brought the problem under attention. I just brought a possible solution under attention. Thanks for clarifying this. Bert On 02/19/2014 06:00 AM, Peter Gummer wrote: > Bert Verhees <bert.verhees at rosa.nl> wrote: > >> Maybe this discussion has been on this list before December 2012, I must >> have missed it. > > Hi Bert, > > There was a long discussion 18 months earlier than that one: > > > http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/2011-April/005941.html > > But a proposed fix for the problem was already being discussed five years ago: > > > http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/2009-June/004600.html > > And note that the wiki page was created at the same time: > > > http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/spec/Development+and+Governance+of+Knowledge+Artefacts > > Peter > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
