On 19/03/2018 22:25, Pablo Pazos wrote:
Hi Thomas, the definition of DV_DURATION is clear to me :)
The issue is on the 1.0.2 specs, I guess they used DV_DURATION in
C_DURATION because the referenced Duration class in C_DURATION was not
included on the specs. _This is the issue I'm pointing to, the missing
class._
Right - the ADL/AOM 1.4 specs made the assumption that each primitive
constrainer type i.e. C_INTEGER, C_STRING, C_DATE, C_DURATION etc,
constrained a same- or similarly named primitive type like Integer,
String, Date, Duration etc that are assumed to be part of the technology
environment. THey are normally part of the programming language, DB, or
serialisation formalisms.
I think this probably was not as clear as it should have been in that spec.
In the AOM2/ADL2 specs, we have clarified this so that the same types
(C_INTEGER etc) now refer to types that are defined in the Foundation
spec of the BASE component.
Clarifying that on an errata addendum would help to avoid such
implementation mistakes, that are really caused by the missing
information on the spec + interpretation to fill the gap.
agree, we should do this - can you create a PR for this? Or add to an
existing PR.
BTW, this is one case that I detected because I'm doing research for a
new course. There might be issues like this on other areas of 1.0.2, I
mean missing classes referenced from AOM or AOP. I didn't do a
complete review of the specs.
I would love to migrate everything to baseline spec and use AOM2, but
I can't afford the cost right now. I'm sure others are on my same
position.
hopefully that will change soon, because ADL2 is more regular and
simpler than ADL1.4 - the ADL2 OPT for example is much easier to
process. I'd be interested to know what the real costs are and to see
what we can do to make the transition simpler, because staying with
ADL1.4 is limiting system functionality for the future.
BTW tried to check if the issue is also on 1.0.3 but the link to
support is broken http://openehr.org/RM/Release-1.0.3/support.html
the page where you got that link
<https://www.openehr.org/releases/RM/Release-1.0.3/docs/index> is now fixed.
- thomas
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
