Perhaps the way to pull this off is to get the major VistA stakeholders to agree on a VistA-MUMPS Standard. If the VHA along with most of the following: IHS, CMS, DOD, WorldVistA, VSA, and the MUMPS vendors agreed to extend the portability standards to the existing lowest common limits, then I think we would have made a major leap forward.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Gregory Woodhouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Hardhats" <hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 10:16 AM Subject: [Hardhats-members] Portability guidelines? >I realize there is little interest in updating the MUMPS standard > right now (ignoring, for the moment, the administrative details of > how that could be done), but I wonder if a more modest approach might > be considered. We all know that existing limits (string length, > routine size, etc.) imposed by implementations well exceed those > spelled out in the existing MUMPS portability guidelines. would > existing implementors be willing to consider adopting a revised set > of portability guidelines that are more in line with the current > state of the art/technology > > Gregory Woodhouse > [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
