openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 67, Issue 34

2012-03-19 Thread Klaus D Veil
Heard Sent: Monday, 19 March 2012 09:34 To: 'For openEHR technical discussions' Subject: RE: openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 67, Issue 34 Hi Tim HL7 Twittered about making things more openly available the other daydoes anyone have the link? Cheers, Sam > -Original Message- &g

openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 67, Issue 34

2012-03-19 Thread Sam Heard
Thursday, 23 February 2012 4:44 AM > To: For openEHR technical discussions > Subject: Re: openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 67, Issue 34 > > How can anyone say that HL7 is open in any fashion? You are not free > to distribute it outside of your organization except in small parts so >

openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 67, Issue 34

2012-02-22 Thread Timothy Cook
How can anyone say that HL7 is open in any fashion? You are not free to distribute it outside of your organization except in small parts so that the specifications cannot reproduced. See the paragraph immediately preceding the one previously quoted here: "HL7 CORPORATE/ORGANIZATIONAL MEMBERS are

openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 67, Issue 34

2012-02-21 Thread Peter Gummer
Hi William, I think you may have misread who wrote what. The assertion that HL7 is proprietary was made by Fred Trotter, not by Heath. Peter fred trotter wrote: > ... > Having said that, HL7 RIM is a proprietary ontology/model and OpenEHR, is > not. William Goossen wrote: > Ar this stage mem

openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 67, Issue 34

2012-02-21 Thread William Goossen
Ar this stage membership is open to anyone for both HL7 and OpenEHR. Hence they are both open. Difference is that HL7 is an SDO and OpenEHR a community. But yes both have their copyright approaches. I have not gone through each of them in detail. But as a user of both platforms it does not make

openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 67, Issue 34

2012-02-21 Thread Thomas Beale
Right - I forgot to say: copyright always has to be held somewhere. Copyright has nothing to do with proprietariness - go see W3C specs - all open, all copyrighted (to a responsible open organisation). - thomas On 20/02/2012 23:02, Seref Arikan wrote: > Hi William, > You've got me confused a b

openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 67, Issue 34

2012-02-21 Thread Thomas Beale
On 20/02/2012 22:34, William Goossen wrote: > Hi Heath, Thomas, > > My experience is that HL7 v3 is an open standard and OpenEHR is proprietary > (as owned by the OpenEHR foundation holding the copyrights, albeit I > understand that work is underway to sort that out). > > * > * Correction: HL7 is

openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 67, Issue 34

2012-02-20 Thread William Goossen
[mailto:openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org] On Behalf Of openehr-technical-request at openehr.org Sent: maandag 20 februari 2012 23:25 To: openehr-technical at openehr.org Subject: openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 67, Issue 34 Send openEHR-technical mailing list submissions to openehr

openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 67, Issue 34

2012-02-20 Thread Seref Arikan
unces at openehr.org > [mailto:openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org] On Behalf Of > openehr-technical-request at openehr.org > Sent: maandag 20 februari 2012 23:25 > To: openehr-technical at openehr.org > Subject: openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 67, Issue 34 > > Send openEH