I would have no problem using the openehr-implementers list in either form .
finest regards carl <quote who="Nathan Lea"> >> Q - should the list be completely open to any openEHR member (i.e. >> anyone with a login), as for the existing 3 lists? >> Q - or should it be more closed, to protect commercial sensitivities >> of some members? If so how would new members get onto it? >> >> Personally I think it should be open like the other lists. I believe >> that commercial organisations have to take responsibility themselves >> for using such lists while protecting any "secret" knowledge they >> have. There is always, after all, private email. When we have an >> answer to this, we will provide an access point to the list. > > I agree with Tom's point on this. Sensitivity to secrets of commercial > orgs is of course important, but I feel that understanding by the > community that there are such concerns, especially in an open > environment, should be encouraged; I don't like the idea of making a > more conditional use of a discussion list for implementors, a list I > hope will be as useful a medium to share ideas and discussion as the > other lists. > > With best wishes, > > Nathan > > On 29 Jan 2005, at 14:38, Thomas Beale wrote: > >> >> Dear all, >> >> IMPLEMENTERS LIST >> a discussion list for early adopters has been set up. We decided to >> call it "openehr-implementers" (NOTE spelling of "implementers"!), >> rather than "early-adopters" since in a couple of years' time there >> will be people on the list who are at a mature stage of development. >> >> We are testing the list at the moment. What we need to know from the >> community is how we should run it. >> >> Q - should the list be completely open to any openEHR member (i.e. >> anyone with a login), as for the existing 3 lists? >> Q - or should it be more closed, to protect commercial sensitivities >> of some members? If so how would new members get onto it? >> >> Personally I think it should be open like the other lists. I believe >> that commercial organisations have to take responsibility themselves >> for using such lists while protecting any "secret" knowledge they >> have. There is always, after all, private email. When we have an >> answer to this, we will provide an access point to the list. >> >> >> THE Reply-to PROBLEM >> We have asked in the past which way the openEHR community wanted the >> list servers set, and it seemed pretty clear that most people would >> prefer to have Reply-to set to the list, avoiding the annoyance of >> using "reply-all" in your email client. However, our system >> administrators have so far preferred to keep it the way it is, due to >> the extra work involved in dealing with automatic holiday/absence >> mail, as well as various other nuisances. As I am sure everyone will >> agree, email is not what it used to be - spam and the sheer numbers of >> people using email have made life more challenging for those who >> manage systems. Nevertheless, we will endeavour to get this setting >> changed for the community as soon as possible. >> >> - thomas beale >> >> >> - >> If you have any questions about using this list, >> please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org >> >> > --------------- > Nathan C. Lea > Research Fellow > Electronic Healthcare Record Systems > Centre for Health Informatics and Multiprofessional Education > Royal Free and University College London Medical School > 4th Floor, Holborn Union Building > Archway Campus > Highgate Hill > London N19 5LW > www.ehr.chime.ucl.ac.uk > > - > If you have any questions about using this list, > please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org > -- Carl Mattocks co-Chair OASIS (ISO/TS 15000) ebXMLRegistry Semantic Content SC co-Chair OASIS Business Centric Methodology TC CEO CHECKMi v/f (usa) 908 322 8715 www.CHECKMi.com Semantically Smart Compendiums [AOL] IM CarlCHECKMi - If you have any questions about using this list, please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org
