Kerry Raymond wrote: > >> A pragmatic approach would be to do what you say. We could probably >> argue for this just on the basis of the fact that many reference >> models (i.e. object models) are not well constructed, and out of the >> control of the archetype designers, and/or that models consdered good >> today are shown up later on by changing requirements, which changes >> the validity of inheritances such as the one Kerry points out. > > > Yes, that's the angle I'm coming from (where we don't control the > reference model). > > And in any case, I don't see the openEHR following the purist road of > having FullySpecifiedDateTime or > ObjectIdThatIsntArchetypeIdNorTerminologyIdEtc :-)
nicely put;-). I have created a new change request for this. (New CRs will shortly be visible on the new openEHR CR tracker). - thomas - If you have any questions about using this list, please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org
