As an outsider you need to understand the standard and if you don't it
will take a lot longer. It something that does take effort and time to
digest.

Well, I'm an outsider but I do have eyes and ears.. before I spend
6 months of my life attempting to digest a technical format, I
spend time seeing how others actually use it. And it seems like
it has a fundamental flaw in that those who use it see no problem
with 'agreeing' to the flavour of the standard before they start
talking..

They "should" be able to send you their HL7 V2.3.1 as per the
Australian standard, certified by AHML and using LOINC codes specified
by IT-14-6-5. The fact that cannot is a problem, A compliance problem.

You are the only AHML compliant messenger in Australian health.
Doesn't that scream 'problem' to you. As you said, HL7v2 has been
around for 20 years.. I would have thought a couple of these
other larger HL7 organisations would have found that time to swing
some programming time on achieving AHML compliance - or is it
not in their interest for messages to be exchanged in a compliant
format?

They may have laughed a lot longer and louder if you asked them for
Data in the 'Andrew Patterson XML Format' you had just devised.

Don't get me wrong - I have no interest in defining any of my own
formats..

That a lot better than starting from scratch every time!

No doubt - am not suggesting in the slightest that entities
rolling their own standard is an option. I just have a
conceptual problem - I'm interested in decentralised messaging
between GP's, path labs, radiology labs, pharmacists and
patients. I'm worried that HL7 as an organisation
doesn't see any problem with
requiring each and every vendor for every one of those
participants to agree in a separate 2-way negotiation about
what 'standard' flavour they want to use.. (seems like a
recipe for centralised 'toll' gatekeepers who will 'fix'
your messages up for you - which funnily enough seems
to be what we currently have)..

Andrew
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk

Reply via email to