Tim Churches wrote: > Tom Bowden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Model 1. Messages are created to a defined >> specification/standard/implementation by the originating practice >> management system. They are then sent by a messaging system that (prior >> to signing and sending them), checks them (for structural conformance >> only) against the published standard. Messages are not changed by the >> intermediate system. The proponent of this system argues that the task >> of ensuring that the message structure is correct and complete belongs >> to the originating system and that most of the originating systems are >> now capable of sending appropriately structured messages and thus are >> capable of being used for this purpose. >> >> Model 2. The second option includes a messaging system that >> incorporates an interface engine capable of transforming messages. The >> proponent argues that end point systems are not capable of sending or >> receiving standardised messages and therefore a message transformation >> service is needed in the middle. Due to perceived deficiencies in the >> end-point-systems the original messages are transformed by the >> intermediate system to remedy the perceived deficiencies. > > I'm at an open-source in health conference in Kuala Lumpur right now and have > seen MIRTH in action and have to say it is the ant's pants and can handle > both of the above with ease and elegance. All free, open-source, well > supported (by the vendor in the US, but it's well written open-source so no > reason why it can't be supported locally if a support company wanted to pick > it up), and they have a nifty "appliance" version the size of a hardback > novel which just plugs in to your network, draws about 5 watts of power and > handles all messaging. See http://www.mirthproject.org
Hi Tim, I have had a play with MIRTH as well and its quite good. Medical-Objects can interoperate with Mirth and we have been in touch with the developers to try and standardise GELLO a bit as we have both written a GELLO compiler. Its fine to connect 2 sites and does have interface engine abilities, as they realize its needed as well. However any PKI setup of addressing is quite manual, or at least it was previously. In many ways it similar to Kestrals HL7Connect, which we also interoperate with. Having a centrally maintained online directory and key store makes setting up new end points easy and I think thats whats lacking from Mirth at the moment, although I have not looked at it for a few months. Andrew McIntyre _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
