> On Fri, 2007-11-09 at 20:03 +1000, Thomas Beale wrote: > > > - that if content in the form of a PDF is sent to an openEHR system, it is > > not lost, > > and it is accessible in the same way for all opeEHR systems > > Okay. But isn't this really a matter of the "content" validation that > was mentioned before?
We could cover the handling of opaque formats like PDF in that group of tests as well. > > > > > - that if a set of standard HL7v2 messages (e.g. as used in Australia) are > > received, they are correctly processed into openEHR content. > > Again, I would like to assert that there is an openEHR way of storing, > manipulating and transferring information. We should not care (from an > openEHR standpoint) where the information originated. Only that we can > preserve and present it in an "openEHR" way. Its not so much where the information originated, it is a question of whether the semantics are preserved and correctly represented. We can (and do already) develop openEHR templates for this purpose. I think it will be useful to show hat 2 systems that claim to accept let's 5 specific HL7 messages both end up with the sam answer. The question is about the conversion of the HL7 format into the openEHR format, i.e. what are the fine-grained correspondences. All this would be an optional or separete conformance profile. - thomas
