;
> If you are keen to infer from these numbers whether it has never been
> published, why not use v1.0.1 up to v1.0.n for any not yet published
> revision. On publishing, it then could be v1.1.0 or v1.1.1 (or so). It
> is not quite as clear (but as I said I don't think it makes any
> difference), but at least it is not requiring us to make incompatible
> changes under the old archetype id for all versions after v0. Or the
> prepublication revisions are even called draft: v1.draft.1 up to
> v1.draft.n and v.1.0.0 or v.1.1.0 (e.g.) on first publishing.
I think this is the danger of how we use the word 'publishing'...
Are we getting closer to a solution?
- thomas
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20110712/366a0bfb/attachment.html>
I like the idea of a warning on the use (or misuse, purpose...) part
of the archetype.
I also believe that anything thas has been made public needs to have a
unique identifier
2011/7/12 Sebastian Garde :
>
>
> Am 11.07.2011 17:43, schrieb Thomas Beale:
>
> On 21/06/2011 10:04, Heather Leslie wrote
Hi Koray,
In 2009 I did an IHE Medical Summary profile based Template for the
Interoperability Demonstration at HIC. I can't recall the exact
relationships between CCR, CCD and IHE Medical Summary profiles but they
pretty much cover the same concepts. The template was only a subset of the
Referra
27;t think it makes any
difference), but at least it is not requiring us to make incompatible
changes under the old archetype id for all versions after v0. Or the
prepublication revisions are even called draft: v1.draft.1 up to
v1.draft.n and v.1.0.0 or v.1.1.0 (e.g.) on first publishing.
In summary: Do anything, but please do not change the archetype id just
before publication.
Sebastian
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20110712/e56ef94a/attachment.html>
Wow - I'm extremely interested...
It'd be great to have a look at the artefacts. Happy to share with the
community after I put them into a good shape. This we intend to use as the
starting point for our national minimum core summary record in New Zealand.
Cheers,
-koray
-Original Message-
5 matches
Mail list logo