For one thing, I am very uncomfortable with MUMPS (or any other
language) being included in the suite of health care standards. Even
if we're happy with the language today (and I'm not so sure they
are), I don't think that the implementation language should be
specified in advance. If someone were to come along and write an EMR
system entirely in C, Ada or Java that is entirely indistinguishable
from VistA, it would still fail to be standards compliant! In
addition, this approach locks us in to aging technology, even when
better alternatives exist.
===
Gregory Woodhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Design quality doesn't ensure success, but design failure can ensure
failure."
--Kent Beck
On Sep 13, 2005, at 9:02 AM, A. Forrey wrote:
Hardhats:
Here is a notice about an activity that will have a major impact on
the OPen VistA/VOE project. It has not been mentioned on this forum
but should be understood by all. It will have relevance to the
proposed MDC reactivation and the role that MDC might play in the
whole picture. My view is that the MDC will be very important to
the VOE/VistA effort. The HITSP will replace the current ANSI HISB
and will hopefully have a active role in bringing together the
industry with the health professional disciplines in dealing with
the health information domain. I encourage comments about all of
this on this forum.
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
