Thank you to all for your helpful suggestions. I shall start to go through them all and see what we can do. No doubt I'll be seeking further advice in due course.
The basic problem for us is that changes to code are controlled by the software house HQ. Sometimes changes take months (on one occasion 18 months I am told) to be introduced. For this particular problem they have given the official response that they do not intend to change the functionality. I don't see how we can continue to develop documentation until they do. There is a theory in psychology about learned helplessness. If you keep giving a rat an electric shock even when it attempts to do things to avoid the shock, it eventually gives up and just sits there being shocked. In psychiatry we talk about the locus of control. If we perceive control over our destiny not to be internal we become depressed. It is no wonder that our project has an air of depression about it. Going back to my original email what concerns me is that it seems to be taken on trust that multi million pound software is up to the job and that the negotiations occur around how quickly and how cheaply it can be implemented. Who is actually checking the software meets the needs of the users technically and clinically before handing over the cheque? Apologies for sounding unduly pessimistic here but I think it's a debate that needs to occur. Matt - If you have any questions about using this list, please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org
