Dear Tim and Richard.... I got lost on the old list and someone bumped me this. Richard Hosking wrote: > Reading the OpenEHR site again - they are progressing and seem to be the > best candidates for an information model. There is 20 years of research > behind the concepts. Unfortunately they are using Java, Eiffel, and C#, > but the info is open (Mozilla license - is this a problem?) The currenly available openEHR tools are all for creating and validating Archetype definitions. The choice of languages is not really a problem for such support tools. Mozilla license is fully open source, and rather less restrictive than the GPL. No problem at all. > How could we translate Archetypes into SQL tables in a database? > I guess it could be done by hand - better would be some sort of parser. > This is a separate issue to the user interface of course The idea is that Archetypes are the storage mechanism - just text files - but this implies the existence of openEHR storage engines which can make use of them. SAM> The archetypes actually specify how a particular reusable information structure (or data group in NEHTA) is to be represented (and stored) using the openEHR information model - which provides the database schema. This is the missing part of the puzzle - not such engines are generally available, either as open source or commercially, althought there is a Swedish one which is very poorly documented at present. SAM> Ocean have a .Net one which will hopefully be open source if we get suffucient sponsors. The DSTC have one based on 0.96. It is likely that there will be open source components but that the openEHR backend will be marketed to ensure upgrading and maintenance in a streamlined manner. We will have to wait and see how the space fills. Anyone wanting to join the open source effort should look on the openEHR site. A few companies have built their own engines for use in specifica products, but openEHR Arcetypes won't fly until there is a range of open source and commercial data storage and retrieval engines for it. SAM> I agree - but there as many are on the way and we have to get the information structures standardised if we are going to share information it is worth getting on with it! Tim C |
_______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
