Karsten
I do not go with the screen shot idea - the issue here is the accountability
and if the information is stored in an explicit manner and the rendition can
be stored (XSLT or application) then it will be clear what the person saw -
the problem with screenshots is the plethora of views that m
Hi All,
I am rather late to this thread, but it seems to me that there are a
number of alternatives here:
a) Do nothing
b) Have a reasonably secure system, but no signing
c) Sign the content in the database
d) Sign what was on the screen and store the signed image
You can spend all day arguing
Andrew Goodchild wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>I am rather late to this thread, but it seems to me that there are a
>number of alternatives here:
>
>a) Do nothing
>b) Have a reasonably secure system, but no signing
>c) Sign the content in the database
>d) Sign what was on the screen and store the signed im
On 16-09-2002 03:03, "Thomas Beale" wrote:
> I think this is a good overall comment. To which I'll add that what
> needs to be shown to have been understood in court are simple clinical
> or other facts, in the form of propositions, not screen bit patterns. In
> court, it will nee to be shown tha
Sam,
There is a difference between looking at various screens during a
consultation and the signing of part of the information that needs to be
signed. E.g. Orders, communications with others.
It is clearly not necessary to make movies of what was presented on the
screen during the consultation.
>> Lastly, one simple question. How does TNO propose to handle
>> the audit trail of signed screenshots simply in terms of
>> storage requirements ?
>>
> This is a simple problem.
> Now every year one hospital needs 1 kilometre of shelf space.
Well, the treeware equivalent of what we are talki
6 matches
Mail list logo
