On 16-12-15 10:52, Diego Boscá wrote:
The concept_id part from the archetype_hrid shows all the parents of a
given node (or at least did in 1.4)
According to the Grammar for Adl this seems not the case.
There can only be one archetypeRef in an specialization-section
archetype:
SYM_ARCHETYPE metaData?
ARCHETYPE_HRID specializationSection?
specializationSection :SYM_SPECIALIZE archetypeRef ;
archetypeRef :ARCHETYPE_HRID |ARCHETYPE_REF ;
ARCHETYPE_HRID :ARCHETYPE_HRID_ROOT '.v' VERSION_ID ;
ARCHETYPE_REF :ARCHETYPE_HRID_ROOT '.v' INTEGER ('.' DIGIT+ )* ;
2015-12-16 10:42 GMT+01:00 Bert Verhees <bert.verh...@rosa.nl>:
On 16-12-15 09:50, Diego Boscá wrote:
Parsing current archetype identifiers you can know the specialization
depth and compare it with root node_id.
Hi Diego,
Thanks for your answer, and I hope you will answer my follow up question
I thought the the versionId's in the archetype_hrid denote the
corrections/versions on an archetype.
But maybe I misunderstand that concept.
Or are you referring to something else?
Bert
2015-12-16 9:42 GMT+01:00 Bert Verhees <bert.verh...@rosa.nl>:
Hi all,
I am looking at this error message from
http://www.openehr.org/releases/AM/latest/docs/AOM2/AOM2.html#_validity_rules
VARCN: archetype concept validity. The node_id of the root object of the
archetype must be of the form id1{.1}*, where the number of .1 components
equals the specalisation depth, and must be defined in the terminology.
(which has a spelling-error in "specalisation", it should be
"specialisation")
My first question:
How can the parser know the specialization-depth?
When I look at the grammar, it seems not possible to layer the
specializationSection
So it can only check that it is a specialization.
Or am I overseeing something
My second question:
There is another thing, only small, thing, not very important, but I
thought, I mention it anyway.
In the grammar specialization is spelled in the US way ( in
specialization_section : SYM_SPECIALIZE archetype_ref ;), while in the
error-messages specialisation is spelled in the UK-way (in VASID).
Is there a preferred spelling for when handling texts which belong to
software-definitions?
Thanks
Bert
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
