So are you saying that persisted clinical data is never converted to conform to newer versions of an achetype, or simply that one is not compelled to convert?
Randolph On 11/8/07, Rong Chen <rong.acode at gmail.com> wrote: > > On 11/8/07, Randolph Neall <randy.neall at veriquant.com> wrote: > > > > Thomas, thanks for your extended remarks. Your point is one you've made > > for a long time, that relational db schemas cannot keep up with the real > > world. I'm just wondering if moving the problem out of the relational DB and > > into blobs (persisted objects, I take it) solves the problem you so > > eloquently depict. Yes, it solves the schema problem. I grant you that. But > > you're still left with imperfect and changing models even with blobs. I've > > read the openEHR specs enough to know that when an archetype version > > changes, one is obliged to convert all existing records (blobs) to conform > > to the new version, and that, it > > > > That is not true. When an archetype version changes, new data are > created/validated by new version of the archetype while old data (blobs or > whatever) are still processed by old archetypes. In the root node of the > data, there is always information about the archetype (and its version) used > to create the data ( LOCATABLE.archetype_details). So there is really no > need to convert existing data when archetype changes. Hope this clarifies > the matter. > > Cheers, > Rong > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20071108/cb12e40e/attachment.html>
