pe ianmcnicoll
> ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com
> ian at mcmi.co.uk
>
> Clinical Analyst Ocean Informatics
> Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, University College London
> openEHR Archetype Editorial Group
> Member BCS Primary Health Care SG Group www.phcsg.org / BCS Health
> Scotland
>
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org
>
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
>
--
*This e-mail message is intended exclusively for the addressee(s). Please
inform us immediately if you are not the addressee.*
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20140218/0bb9982e/attachment.html>
any archetypes about the same concept in e.g. different
> regions/countries in the meantime (and likely more than one forever).
> Sebastian
>
>
--
*This e-mail message is intended exclusively for the addressee(s). Please
inform us immediately if you are not the addressee.*
--
l mailing list
>> openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org
>> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
>
>
--
*Dr. Sebastian Garde*
/Dr. sc. hum., Dipl.-Inform. Med, FACHI/
Senior Developer
Ocean Informatics
Skype: gardeseb
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20140218/3bb3e482/attachment.html>
r).
Sebastian
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20140218/85ae6519/attachment.html>
On 02/18/2014 03:52 PM, Sebastian Garde wrote:
>
> On 18.02.2014 14:56, Bert Verhees wrote:
>> For example, in the OpenEHR, the idea was that CKM would serve the
>> world with archetypes, and there would be no need of a strong
>> archetypeId-system, because, all archetypes ever to be taken
>> se
Hi Sebastian,
I think the original 'one-archetype-per-concept' statement was really
applicable within a single repository or 'framework'. Much as we might
want there only ever to be one for the world, this was clearly only
ever going to be possible in the very long term, and quite impossible
for s
Hi Bert,
I don't think you need to convince anyone that the archetype_id
mechanism 'would do'. The question of namespacing/ oids etc started
to be discussed long before 2012, although it is blindingly easy to
get around most namespace collisions with some 'pseudo-namespace'
suffixes e.g. EVALUATI
On 02/18/2014 02:56 PM, Bert Verhees wrote:
> By the way, do they in the UK still use British Standard Whitworth?
In response of my own rather cynical looking post, I must say that I am
not cynical at all. I have other expectations.
I think the health-ICT should focus on interoperability on base
On 18.02.2014 14:56, Bert Verhees wrote:
> For example, in the OpenEHR, the idea was that CKM would serve the
> world with archetypes, and there would be no need of a strong
> archetypeId-system, because, all archetypes ever to be taken seriously
> were in CKM.
> Now it is recognized that this
On 02/18/2014 01:36 PM, Ian McNicoll wrote:
> As I understand it, the idea of the ENTRY sub-classes was to remove
> some of this variability in the top-level patterns and strike some
> sort of balance between your two contradictory wishes.
I don't think so.
It is the wish, I know, of all working o
Hi Bert,
The reason that I have pushed to introduce an ENTRY class is to avoid
having these kind of arguments!! Fundamentally I think your post
beautifully highlights the problem.
At first you rightly complain about the ad-hoc styling and variability
of archetypes i.e we need more consistency, mo
Hi Gerard,
Good question. The value is not in the classification but in the
attributes provided by the class. These save me some work as a
modeller, should help the developer optimise some system aspects
optimally (e.g by knowing that every ACTION archetype inherits a time
and status that can be o
Hi Ian,
Maybe it is hard to find an classified evaluated observation. You are
right. Maybe this is a bad example.
Maybe it is only a matter of art or style, I am talking about.
What I see is that there is no congruent style in archetypes.
They are (excuse me, no offense meant) a collection of a
...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20140218/92057a3b/attachment.html>
14 matches
Mail list logo
