That is gone in ADL2.
in ADL2 you can know the specialisation depth of the archetype by
looking at the root node code, e.g.
id1 -> depth = 0
id1.1 -> depth = 1
etc
For US/international English spelling, we tend to use International
English for all natural language, and where we can, accommodate US
English in the formal spec. Thus, an ADL parser has to be able to parse
specialise | specialize. The error texts probably are not consistent.
Bert, can you create a PR for 'ADL2/AOM2 documentation errors' or
similar in the main PR tracker. If you find a number of them, it wold be
preferable to include them all in the description of the one PR, rather
than create a proliferation of PRs, for obvious reasons.
An official release of AOM2/ADL2 is around the corner and we'll include
fixes for any errors you find.
thanks
- thomas
On 16/12/2015 09:52, 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)
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
--
*Thomas Beale*
Management Board, Specifications Program Lead, openEHR Foundation
<http://www.openehr.org>
Chief Technology Officer, Ocean Informatics
<http://www.oceaninformatics.com>
Chartered IT Professional Fellow, BCS, British Computer Society
<http://www.bcs.org/category/6044>
Health IT blog <http://wolandscat.net/> Culture blog
<http://wolandsothercat.net/>
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
