Archetype versioning on CKM

2011-04-28 Thread Heather Leslie
An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20110428/6287abf1/attachment.html>

Archetype versioning on CKM

2011-04-28 Thread Heather Leslie
An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20110428/0bd7a478/attachment.html>

Fwd: [Fwd: Re: Archetype versioning on CKM]

2011-04-28 Thread Heather Leslie
An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20110428/143ac7ac/attachment.html>

Archetype versioning on CKM

2011-04-28 Thread Thomas Beale
in purely research systems - so I think the need for 'v0' doesn't go away... - thomas -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20110428/0a22173d/attachment.html>

Archetype versioning on CKM

2011-04-28 Thread Thomas Beale
should archetypes be referenced from data? * what system of hashing and signing should be used? - thomas* * ------ next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20110428/6eacdbf4/attachment.html>

Archetype versioning on CKM

2011-04-28 Thread Heather Leslie
An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20110428/cfbff873/attachment.html>

Archetype versioning on CKM

2011-04-28 Thread Heather Leslie
An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20110428/1e0e6edd/attachment.html>

Archetype versioning on CKM

2011-04-28 Thread David Moner
(Espa?a) -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20110428/9cdfe73f/attachment.html>

Archetype versioning on CKM

2011-04-28 Thread Diego Boscá
I know that a draft is supposed to change, even big breaking changes. what I don't like is the idea of not being able to describe what I am using in my system or even describe it and everyone thinking is another completely different thing I think the main problem here is that we are using a single

Archetype versioning on CKM

2011-04-28 Thread Stef Verlinden
Isn't it better that everybody who chooses to use v.0 drafts creates their own internal version numbering so they can keep track of it. As far as i understand there can be more than 1 v.0 of an AT (at least there where for the demographich AT's and some of them might not be present in openE

Archetype versioning on CKM

2011-04-28 Thread Diego Boscá
2011/4/28 Thomas Beale : > On 27/04/2011 10:44, Diego Bosc? wrote: > > I still don't see the problem > > If we wait until an archetype is published to care about versions then > you will have v2 or v3 archetypes as much, which in my opinion breaks > completely versioning purpose. What is the proble