On Wednesday 06 February 2002 13:47, you wrote: > Do you mind if I add this stuff to the linux doc? > > G
Not at all! Take whatever you need. I just think that LinuxDoc-Med is at least the 4th list of projects/links and I was suggesting to make LinuxDoc hosting our Documents, such as Analysis (Requirements), Design, perhaps a StyleGuide etc., instead of being yet another "LinkPortal". Don't get me wrong, please, your links are precious and for sure we would merge them into Spirit, OIO or so. Christian > On Wed, 6 Feb 2002, Christian Heller wrote: > >Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 11:34:59 +0100 > > From: Christian Heller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: Re: Linux doc > > > >Hello all, > > > >the message of Gerardo Arnaez (LinuxDoc-Med) has given me a push to write > >to this list with just another trial/call to bale our forces. What do we > > have? > > > >1 News > > > >http://www.linuxmednews.com > >http://www.euspirit.org > > > >2 MailingList > > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >3 Project Lists > > > >http://www.euspirit.org > >http://www.txoutcome.org/scripts/zope/library/ > >http://www.linuxmednews.com/LMNProjects > >http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/Medicine-HOWTO.html > > > >4 ReadingMaterial Lists > > > >http://www.txoutcome.org/scripts/zope/library/ > >http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/Medicine-HOWTO.html > > > >5 Collective/Package Project > >http://auric.debian.org/~tille/debian-med/ > > > >6 Organization > > > >http://www.oshca.org/ > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >7 Standards > > > >http://www.gehr.org > >http://www.openemed.org (http://healthcare.omg.org) > > > >8 Analysis Documentation > > > >http://resmedicinae.sourceforge.net/model/analysis/index.html > >http://lorenzo.uwstout.edu/QQMIM/medicalfreesource.html > >http://lorenzo.uwstout.edu/QQMIM/qq4.html > > > >9 Design Documentation > > > >http://resmedicinae.sourceforge.net/model/design/index.html > > > >10 Implementation > > > >Different approach (language, models etc.) of every project. > > > >11 My Opinion > > > >11.1 I think LinuxMedNews could try to concentrate on providing News. > > > >11.2 The openhealth list would remain our general (sometimes quite > >philosophical) mailing list. To what concerns the concrete, inter-project > >communication, the OSHCA mailing list might be more suitable. > > > >11.3 Spirit might concentrate on providing a comprising project list. > > > >11.4 The OIOLib would continue to provide links to important material > >(documents, articles, standards etc.). > > > >11.5/11.6 Chapters 5 and 6 are clear. > > > >11.7/11.8/11.9 The linuxdoc-Medicine HowTo is _the ideal_ basis for things > >like Analysis/Design Documents. Just lately, we have talked in our ResMed- > >lists about using LinuxDoc (XML/SGML) which would have the advantage > >to keep the document in a text format and be able to generate HTML, PDF > > etc. > > > >Also, I think that Standards-Documents like Thomas Beale's Archetype paper > >should be offered in LinuxDoc formats. I don't know what the OMG (Dave) > >thinks about it, but I still saw .doc and .ppt files on their pages. > > > >I would be happy (still have to ask the other members of ResMedicinae > >in the list) to move the AnalysisDocument somewhere else where it could > > live on in LinuxDoc format. We would then just place a link but, of > > course, continue to contribute. But it would also keep a lot of work away > > from us. The really comprehensive document is in German at the moment (in > > case you have a look). We would also continue to host the Document within > > our project - if that is still "neutral" enough to the other projects. > >I forgot: The QuickQuack and other resources would have to be merged into > >our AnalysisDoc then, of course. > > > >Concerning the design document. Well, I actually think that all projects > >should use a layered architecture, for example, in which case the design > >of our projects could be quite similar, only that different languages > >are used. However, I see that there are other designs so that we should > >perhaps leave out the DesignDocument for now and concentrate on a common > >AnalyisDocument (Requirements). > > > >11.10 The implementation remains the very own business of each project > >(with friendly exchange of hints/sources/opinions, of course). A little > >concurrence (competition) is good and after some time (years?) some > >major (or united) projects will "survive" or get main stream - economy. > > > >12 Other opinions? > > > >Kind regards, > >Christian -- http://www.resmedicinae.org - Information in Medicine -
