Adding to what was commented, there is a gap between implementers and the
CKM/modeling process.
+ implementers will use any archetype, even drafts, that are published on
the CKM, because those might match the requirements, so for that
implementer the archetype might be OK.
+ implementers can't
Hi,
Thank you for all the responses. It has helped me clear a couple of of
things that need to be keep in mind while using resources from OpenEHR CKM.
Just to summarize,
1. Archetypes in v0 are to be treated as initial suggestions and can
change anytime and without any pattern. Published
Hi
The v1 to v0 migration was a once off thing that was decided to be the best for
never before published archetypes.
I’ve never been a big fan of v0 because of the all the complications it has,
but at least it tells you clearly that all bets are off regarding this
archetype because it is
Hi
Any implementer should be aware of the fact that any un-published archetype is
not stable, and might change both name, ID and have dramatic changes in scope
and elements. To use those is risky.
Ad soon as the archetype is published, a strong governance is put into work.
You will find:
A)
You might also have problems with some archetypes that went from .v1 to .v0
In the archetype history you can see the previous versions, but some will
have a broken history, for instance some archetypes changed name and
archetype id but serve the same purpose as the old archetypes, which broke
any
Hi,
I had used some archetypes from CKM in my templates some time back. Now
when I am revising & reviewing them I notice that some of the archetypes
have newer versions an so my templates give error as they are unable to
locate the older versions that they use. So I have a few questions on the
6 matches
Mail list logo
