Getting in late on comments but......... On Sat, 2004-03-06 at 14:57, Thomas Beale wrote: > some higher level class - e.g. COMPOSITION, since almost all the time it > is the same on DV_TEXT items in a given EHR. We don't think it should be > that high, since language cannot be guaranteed the same throughout a > COMPOSITION
I wholly agree with your analysis. The key trigger phrase above is "almost all the time". Anytime there is vagueness then a solution should be taken into account. This really is the real reason for this specification and model anyway isn't it? To get away from all those "it hardly ever happens", "we'll use the notes field for that" or "five is enough addresses" ... instances in other models. The scenarios given have been excellent and I especially appreciate Dipak's comment; "But when records really are travelling (sic) across the globe, and such translation software is mature, will we have prevented a valuable aid to safe health care?" That kind of vision shared by all those that have worked so hard for so long on this is what makes it the prime solution that it is going to be. Sorry....broke into a little cheer leading there.....<g> Ciao, Tim - If you have any questions about using this list, please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org
