We can't assume that an approved/published Intermountain model (to say something) automatically becomes a published archetype either. So we have a problem here. Which should be the default life cycle state of an auto-generated archetype?
2014-11-13 19:41 GMT+01:00 Thomas Beale <thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com>: > On 13/11/2014 18:37, David Moner wrote: > > I don't think so, but maybe we could use the release_candidate state, > instead the draft one that I mentioned. > > > well I think either could be correct, depending on the circumstances. E.g. > the latest openEHR/FHIR joint Adverse reaction archetype might go in at > 'release_candidate', but many other openEHR ones wouldn't. Even archetypes > that are 'published' according to us could easily go in as drafts, since it > may be that CIMI is the first environment where a really wide group of > reviewers looks at it (and inevitably changes it). > > So.. I don't see any clear rules just yet ;-) > > - thomas > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org > -- David Moner Cano Grupo de Inform?tica Biom?dica - IBIME Instituto ITACA http://www.ibime.upv.es http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmoner Universidad Polit?cnica de Valencia (UPV) Camino de Vera, s/n, Edificio G-8, Acceso B, 3? planta Valencia - 46022 (Espa?a) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20141113/41d806b1/attachment.html>
