An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20090729/c5b5b224/attachment.html
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20090729/eef11df0/attachment.html
Hi Tim,
Two questions regarding your comments:
I want to speak on (what **I** think) is this underlying REAL problem.
I could not understand what the real problem you describe is. Could you
please define it once more?
But the reality is that we have been battling this for more than 45
years
Thomas Beale wrote:
To clarify one thing: UI structures have to be based on templates, which are
essentially specific 'data set' definitions, not archetypes, which
standardise
all content irrespective of any particular use. But I agree with the point
that
any such artefact cannot be
This reminds me a thing. Would be useful to have at ADL level
something like postconditions? (In your example, something stating how
to obtain or validate MBP from available values). I think this falls
into knowledge level.
2009/7/25 Thomas Beale thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com:
Bert
hope this clarifies
Thanks, Thomas, it clarifies why archetypes do not suffice in
application-context for data entry/presentation.
For the moment, we can live without templates (leave it to form-developers
to define where to use a specific archetype-item), or fabricate
template-definition for
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20090726/a7e5ac29/attachment.html
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20090726/fc6b2289/attachment.html
at openehr.org
Subject: Re: Issues around UI technologies and bindings to back end
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:16:20 +0200
From: hepabolu hepab...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Issues around UI technologies and bindings to back end
To: For openEHR technical discussions openehr-technical at openehr.org
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2009 01:59:36 +0930
From: Heath Frankel heath.frankel at oceaninformatics.com
Subject: RE: Issues around UI technologies and bindings to back end
To: 'For openEHR technical discussions'
openehr-technical at openehr.org
Message-ID:
00db01ca0c7b
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20090725/3575dcad/attachment.html
yes - but to do this, they need to be working with templates.
Archetypes on their own don't make sense as direct data-capture models.
Thomas, I wonder why this is, maybe you can explain this or point to an
explanation.
Thanks
Bert
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20090725/5d242ea7/attachment.html
Heath Frankel wrote:
I am not sure if CKM supports XML output of archetypes as yet but if
it is felt that not having archetypes available in XML is holding back
openEHR adoption then I am sure this can be put on the change request
list for prioritisation.
No, it doesn't yet, but
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:16:20 +0200
From: hepabolu hepabolu at gmail.com
Subject: Re: Issues around UI technologies and bindings to back end
To: For openEHR technical discussions openehr-technical at openehr.org
Message-ID: 4A671124.7020002 at gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset
:16:20 +0200
From: hepabolu hepabolu at gmail.com
Subject: Re: Issues around UI technologies and bindings to back end
To: For openEHR technical discussions openehr-technical at openehr.org
Message-ID: 4A671124.7020002 at gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
or plan to support different
models, but the tools that support those models are still unknown to a
lot of potential users
2009/7/23 Greg Caulton caultonpos at gmail.com:
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:16:20 +0200
From: hepabolu hepabolu at gmail.com
Subject: Re: Issues around UI technologies
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20090723/ea56d6d5/attachment.html
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OceanC_small.png
Type: image/png
Size: 4972 bytes
Hi Gavin,
Thanks for the input, Now, to see a little bit more, please visit
http://www.mscui.net/PatientJourneyDemonstrator/
Omer Hotomaroglu notified me of this some time ago, and I guess everyting
here is not in CUI specs yet, but this is a much better demonstration of how
GUI specialization can
Seref Arikan said the following on 22/7/09 11:39:
Now about UI - model relationship, my view is the GUI layer is way too
complex and diverse to include in openEHR specifications, even a subset
of the UI related stuff would be enough to introduce more problems than
it solves.
IF there
Thanks Helma,
Very interesting feedback. Considering one of the authors, Tony Austin, is
in the next room, and here I am hearing about this work from you :)
Kind regards
Seref
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 2:16 PM, hepabolu hepabolu at gmail.com wrote:
Seref Arikan said the following on 22/7/09
Hi,
Even if it feels a little bit too implementation related I'd like to get
your opinions about the various UI implementation ideas/practices you may
have, especially about web based applications.
I've written an initial set of things here :
Hi Seref,
Seref Arikan wrote:
I've written an initial set of things here :
http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/projects/Technology+and+architecture+challenges+in+UI+implementation.
based on Opereffa, but I'd really like to hear how others are tackling UI
layer.
I'm a little bit worried since
23 matches
Mail list logo
