Grahame Grieve wrote:
> Some questions from the External package (v0.9) > > section 4.1: assumed types. This section is very brief. It's > a bit of an odd section, as important things are left > unstated (i.e. what are the expectations of whitespace for > the STRING type?) while trivial things such as cummutivity > of + are defined. I don't know that anything can be said about whitespace in Strings in general, can it? > section 5.3.1, namespace. Why doesn't the valid namespace > character set include such characters as :/&+ that are > valid in URI's? this seems reasonable - I'll get it added. > section 5.3.2 & 5.3.3: ACCESS_GROUP_REF and PARTY_REF inherit > from OBJECT_REF but this isn't stated in the tables. is there > some pattern to when things are and aren't stated in the tables? this was an error that the DSTC already found. > section 5.3.5.1. There's a throwaway line at the end of the > section that archetypes can also be identified by ISO OID's. > While I hope that I never see that ;-), it's not clear from > the stated syntax how that would fit in. Nor, while we're here, > is it clear whether it's valid to use some terminology based > identification (such as LOINC for pathology archetypes) I have to admit, it's not my favourite either - I don't really like OIDs but it seems everyone else does. So archetypes will have two ids: a multi-axial id and an OID (whcih may be optional - we don't know yet). The multi-axial one is defined in detail in the Support RM package 0.9.1 at http://www.deepthought.com.au/health/openEHR/support/support_rm_0_9_1.pdf and I think is a more useful one. - thomas - If you have any questions about using this list, please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org
