On Tuesday 19 September 2006 18:20, Dr John Van Dyck wrote: > So for all this 'hypothetical' we are discussing, isn't it already being > done/been tried by Horst?? > What is anyone suggesting that is different to the attempt he has already > made? More money? More effort? More help? Surely the wheel does > not have to be reinvented?
Not reinvented, but re-implemented. What I use in my practice is a "hack" - it is a large collection of scripts thickly entangled in inter-dependencies, not cleanly separated, horrible to maintain by people other than me. This happened because I kept adding bits and pieces during my lunch break and after work, whenever I had a few minutes spare time, without much planning - just quickly solving the immediate problem at hand. It looks "wow" when people see it in action, but if you look under the hood, it is dead ugly. I gave it several goes trying to disentangle the mess and make it useful to others (mini-gnumed), but never really found the time. Multiple problems include the way I am accessing the drug database (which would breach "intellectual property" in Australia) if I would publish the prescribing module. In the meantime, the original gnumed kept evolving. It has become too complex, too slow for my liking - but appears to be in use in Germany in a number of practices. I haven't done anything for it or with it for a couple of years, but others have carried on the work and keep doing it. Horst _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
