Just a minor comment. The CORBAmed specifications are written to be
generic, you can implement them without CORBA. However, CORBAmed
specifications make CORBA a point of conformance. OMG evaluation
committees always take into consideration extensibility outside of a CORBA
environment.
The question might rather be one of the choice; to architect your system
using certain types of middleware. CORBA is an object approach to
middleware choices. HL7 is a messaging approach to middleware. Both are
fine, and perhaps if architected appropriately, might even prove
complementary to each other.
GEHR fills a space that neither CORBAmed or HL7 fills. I don't know about
HL7 and GEHR, but GEHR and CORBAmed seem to complement each other.
Ditto on CEN, I'm ignorant on how these fit into the landscape. I've only
reviewed a limited subset of the CEN works, but what I've seen seems good.
$0.02,
Mary
At 04:04 PM 3/3/00 +0000, jeff b wrote:
>On Thu, 02 Mar 2000 Alvin B. Marcelo wrote:
> > It has been silent. But I know the projects have been surging on...
> >
> > Question:
> >
> > It was mentioned that most of the open source projects, being generated
> > from ground up, have the unique capability to integrate interoperability
> > right at the start.
> >
> > But has the alliance agreed on what level of interoperability this would
>be?
>
>No. I've tried to bring this up several times, unsuccessfully, and was
>basically either ignored or told what internal data format I should be
>using.
>
> > So far the interoperability solutions that have been presented were:
> >
> > CORBA
> > CORBAmed
> > HL7
> > CEN
> > GEHR
> >
> > Are all these players on the same field? meaning: can I proceed with my
>EMR
> > project, with my own database, with my own programming language, and with
> > my own operating system, and _still_ be interoperable with the other open
> > source projects?
>
>Well, in a word... no.
>
>Each standard is either an interchange format or an idea for how to keep
>data internally. CORBA is a protocol for storing information using an ORB
>(Object Request Broker) and CorbaMed is a subset of that. Of course, that's
>all fine and good unless you aren't using an ORB yourself, in which case
>someone would have to build a bridge for other systems, so it doesn't
>really fly as an interchange format. The GEHR is not an interchange format
>-- it's an idea for how to store medical data, and while it may be good for
>that, it has to rely on something else as an interchange format. (I'm going
>to skin CEN, as I am not familiar with it). Out of all of the items you
>listed, only HL7 has some viability as an interchange format, but it
>requires everyone to either write their own parser or use hl7lib (check out
>sourceforge for this one). I really don't know about all of HL7's
>capabilities or fields, but so long as no one goes the Microsoft
>"proprietary extensions" way on that protocol, it seems to be the way to
>go, otherwise we all get stuck with CorbaMed, which only works for the
>CORBA based projects.
>
> > Which of the above can give me that flexibility?
>
>HL7 is a good idea for an interchange format, but makes a lousy storage
>medium. Use whatever you think is the best for internal data storage, so
>long as you can map it to an interchange format like HL7. (That's why I
>think that in a way GEHR is a really good storage idea -- their mappings
>are excellent)
>
> > Shouldn't we settle this question right now or else go the way of the
> > current proprietary systems?
> >
> > Maybe we're not looking for the best (maybe it isn't there). But we need
> > something common to hold on.
>
>I've been saying this for a very long time as well, but no one ever seems
>to want to talk about it -- everyone would rather talk about why XXXX is
>the greatest thing since sliced bread, but not how we should be blowing off
>this proprietary model of "every man for himself" and forging ahead in the
>Open Source (tm) way ... by using our collective bargaining and brain power
>to bring a new standard.
>
>We all have to compete with guys like WebMD, who frankly have much more
>money and man-power than any of the groups working on free projects. But I
>think we have a better way of doing things, and if we don't all kill each
>other or committee everything to death, we have a good chance of being able
>to change the world of electronic medicine.
>
>I'm coming down off the pulpit now.
>
>*************************
>jeff b
>system administrator
>university communications
>university of connecticut
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
