-1 for YARGP (yet another random global property) +1 for managing through privileges. If we want to toggle the ability to create reference term while mapping, then make a Can Create Reference Term While Mapping privilege and let the admin decide who -- if anyone -- they want to grant it to. Personally, I would trust anyone who can create rerference term entries to control him/herself when editing mappings if we decided not to create them from the concept editing form... so I could live without the extra privilege and manage it socially.
In either case, it's going to be important to distinguish between creating a new reference term vs. selecting an existing one -- i.e., instead of just making the field behave as a free text field that automatically creates a reference term if you happen to make a type in the code, there should be an explicit "create new term" option (in the choice list or via small link) that prompts for source/name/code (in a popup) and then automatically adds it as a mapping once created. -Burke On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Darius Jazayeri <[email protected]>wrote: > My assumption about how many implementation dictionaries are managed > (though I haven't verified) is that you would almost never map a concept to > a term, but occasionally someone will tell you that the ICD code for malaria > is xyz, and you'll add that one mapping to a concept. > > So I agree that enabling this workflow via a global property makes sense. > > -Darius (by phone) > > On Aug 30, 2011 3:01 PM, "Wyclif Luyima" <[email protected]> wrote: > > I get a feeling that some implementations want to be able to create new > terms on the fly since they are not going to import terms as such, right? > And others don't because the terms will be already imported so creating new > ones would be a rare case me, therefore it would be no big deal for them to > first go to another form and first create the new term before using it. > To me, this calls for adding a boolean global property to allow/disallow > creating terms on the fly and it will be up to the admin to set it > accordingly. > > On another note, we(me and Darius) agreed during the scrum chat this > morning as suggested by burke's email that we will be adding a service > method that fetches term-to-term mappings for a reference term where it is > the term b in the mapping i.e 'incoming' mappings to a term from other > terms, then these will be listed on the create/edit reference term form as > links to the actual terms(term As) that own the mapping. > > I agree with making name nullable but unique and leaving it blank during > migration. > > Wyclif > > > > > On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Burke Mamlin <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Aug 3... > > ________________________________ > Click here to unsubscribe from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list > > ------------------------------ > Click here to > unsubscribe<[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l>from > OpenMRS Developers' mailing list > _________________________________________ To unsubscribe from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list, send an e-mail to [email protected] with "SIGNOFF openmrs-devel-l" in the body (not the subject) of your e-mail. [mailto:[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l]
