On 13/11/2014 10:02, Heather Leslie wrote: > I've had discussions with IHTSDO about needing a formal statement about SCT > that should be placed in archetypes and this will be identical to that which > they are currently working on with CIMI. > > Regards > > Heather
The main thing we need to do with this in my view is put most of such statements online in each user org (CIMI, Intermountain, openEHR etc) and make the text that is in the archetype itself as short as legally possible. Consider that putting the whole (identical) statement for each acknowledged type of IP in the current CIMI archetypes - 2200 of them - would a) dwarf the main content in most of those archetypes and b) create a source of unnecessary updates to archetypes. Consider a licence notice for SNOMED CT for example. If it mentions 'IHTSDO', it will most likely be out of date in a year's time if IHTSDO changes its name next year, as was talked about at the recent meeting in Amsterdam, and that's 2200 archetypes that have to be put through a revision and reissue process, unnecessarily. - thomas
