I'd like to thank Tim for his supporting comments for our work. I'm not sure how I can counteract the problem of Universities having an ivory tower image but I hope my history shows I have an attitude that practice drives theory/principles, and theory is proven or disproven by practice. I have a careeer of builidng software and selling it (sometimes unsuccessfully). In the 1970s from a theoretical base I designed and built the first systems for recording human beahviour in real-time by designing a generic language of behaviour (the basis of analytics) and specific controlled description languages for a variety of sports (cricket, afl, rugby, surfing, waterpolo). The AFL version was taken up by the television industry and so i built the first industrial strength system in which real-time game analytics were projected onto the screen during the play. That is a process of theory to practice to industrial system. Tim has already mentioned the Scamseek project which was a mixture of good principles guiding industrial development. What Tim didn't say was that Scamseek came in under budget, on-time, and over specifications.
Our current research has focused on ED because Tim proposed it as a pathway in line with his comments this morning, and an Area Health Service was prepared to collaborate. One of the things they have got out of the collaboration is a remarkably detailed and extensive process analysis of their ED done by one of talented students - properly managed. It is now the springboard for two things: a. how we go about doing our work, b. the design and experimentation for proving the usefulness or not of a functioning Generative Hospital Information Management System (GHIMS). So if people wish to form a consortium we are most willing to make contribution - the community has to show the will. cheers jon Quoting Tony Eviston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Tim Churches wrote: > > > > Thus I think it would be worth the while of subscribers to this list > to > > take an active interest in this project, and, picking up on Tony's > > hypothetical, to seriously think about approaching Jon with regard to > > collaboration on the mooted open source GP system. > > > Thats the sort of suggestion I was looking for ...but.. > How can we resolve the potential conflict between the donors need for > efficiency and deliverable product and what might be perceived as the > academic need to extend the boundaries into research areas (a perception > of Ivory tower syndrome)? > > Tony > _______________________________________________ > Gpcg_talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk > ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
