Well XML seems like a fairly basic standard to me.
The data is identified as such and grouped in a hierarchy. But its
decsription and constraints are entirely open and undefined. I guess its
a useful lowest common denominator
R
Horst Herb wrote:
On Tuesday 12 December 2006 23:49, Richard Hosking wrote:
Presumably each data item is wrapped in a set of xml tags - do they use
a common set or are the tags defined for each vendor? Presumably they
would be nested something like
<DB>
<table>
<element>
</element>
</table>
</DB>
I never understood the terrible bloat of XML - why, oh why, when equally
powerful yet eminently more readable and vastly more efficient options are
available - options that are even easier to parse than XML too.
http://www.yaml.org
http://www.json.org
With the rapid spread of AJAX technology and AJAX really increasingly becoming
AJAJ (using JSON for object serialization instead of XML), JSON looks like a
safe bet.
I think when "managers" dream up health messaging, they have to come with a
convoluted ambiguous monstrosity like HL7 - and when they dream up a
universal data exchange format, they come up with XML. Certainly not the
doings of real life software engineers ...
Horst
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
