Grahame Grieve wrote: >> At the moment we have not seen any need for multiple inheritance in >> archetypes. >> > > I see this as very similar to multiple inheritance in objects. > There is no *need*, but there is useful things that can be done. > The question is whether the price is justified. > > The use case is relatively simple in concept - allowing multiple > inheritance would allow me to "cross-cut" concerns. I could write > an archetype that only dealt a narrow aspect of an information > structure, such as data integrity issues, and then use it across > multiple archetypes, letting them focus on the big picture, not > the minutiae of data integrity, which is mostly overlooked but > ubiquitiously present. > Hi Grahame, in openEHR at least, data integrity is not defined or solved by archetypes - it is in the reference model.
- thomas
