It shouldn't be happening. I need to know the link that is giving you
trouble, so I can fix it.
Thanks,
Dave
John S. Gage writes:
> David,
> I can't seem to get into the various standards from your web page on
> Telemed. When I click on COAS, for example, I get an access denied. Is
> this temporary?
> John
>
> David Forslund wrote:
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > I thought this was discussed pretty thoroughly a while back. I know I
> > responded to it but
> > haven't recently because I was attacked for proposing a solution even
> > though it was
> > based totally on international open non-proprietary standards.
> >
> > > > 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
> >
> > I don't believe this statement about an ORB is quite accurate. One could
> > do everything described above an be compatible with CORBAmed if the
> > particular relevant interfaces are also implemented. You don't have to use
> > an ORB yourself, it could just be the gateway to other information. The
> > CORBAmed specification, itself,is rather silent on the data interchange
> > format but supports those provided by others (HL7, CEN, etc.). But it can
> > provide complete interoperability in the services if one implements the
> > interfaces.
> >
> > >-- 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.
> >
> > CORBAmed specifications are being implemented in DCOM and could be in other
> > systems, too.
> > It is intended for interoperable services and relies on one being able to
> > "negotiate" through essentially a namespace as to the data representations.
> >
> > > > 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)
> >
> > The GEHR model is fully compatible with the CORBAmed specification and
> > could be implemented within it quite nicely.
> >
> > HL7 will be much more useful as an interchange format once it is fully in
> > XML. However, one needs
> > more than an interchange format for one to be able to link multiple
> > clinical systems together and access them simultaneously. I believe a
> > service-oriented architecture is the only thing which will support this
> > kind of functionality.
> >
> > >
> > > > 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.
> >
> > I think we should forge ahead in the "open-source" way. This does not mean
> > we should ignore various international standards. We've tried to
> > demonstrate this by providing "open-source" implementations of CORBAmed
> > standards. I think others on this group are doing the same. I know of no
> > other way to provide true interoperability.
> >
> > >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.
> >
> > Exactly. We make this point in a recent book chapter which has been
> > published. I'd be happy to provide a reference to it if anyone is interested.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > >I'm coming down off the pulpit now.
> > >
> > >*************************
> > >jeff b
> > >system administrator
> > >university communications
> > >university of connecticut
> > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
>
