Tim Cook wrote: > [extracted from the thread "Archetype documentation using XML + XSLT"] > >> Tim Cook wrote: >> >> >>>> >>>> >>> ADL does semantically describe the AOM. >>> >>> >> No reason why XML could not. >> >> It can suffice for anything from a webform (e.g. XForms) to a vector >> graphic (e.g. SVG) to an object model to formatted text (e.g. XHTML) >> to >> an office file (e.g. ODF or OOXML) to a process such as XSLT. >> >> > > Hi Adam, > > Please let me start by saying that I would be foolish in challenging > your expertise in using the XML family of specifications and tools to > represent and communicate data. You are certainly more knowledgeable in > this than I. > > On the surface you may well be able to represent the AOM in XML. I will > propose though that this is not the best way in real implementations to > do so. IMHO it is akin to the philosophy that using a SQL database to > persist any kind of data is appropriate because everyone else is using > them. This is simply an incorrect and inefficient approach as well > evidenced by the fact that 30% or more of an application goes into just > translating an object model into a SQL model. This also increase the > machine resources needed as well as the maintenance resources of the > application. > > Stepping outside of well supported standards increases maintenance requirements much much more.
Heck why not write your ADL handling etc in PICK ? You might find it hard to get Dell et all to support Pick on your choice of hardware so why not try & build your own hardware with Pick optimised chips while you're at it? I am assuming that you would feel OK about running on top of a commodity OS itself running on top of commodity hardware? At one stage I hsd to use Cache & on another it was IBM's IMS but hierarchical db's never took the world by storm & their (now) non standard nature ipso facto increase maintenance costs If you want to write your very own persistence mechanism/db I cannot but admire your ambition but I would caution wrt expecting others wishing to use it vs spending a bit more on hardware. > There are important differences between data and information. To > understand the significance of the mismatch between flat message > protocols and a hierarchical semantic model of information you may want > to review some of the concepts in information sciences. > > Yup. See my reply to Tom wrt our looking at only sending the changeable data in an HL7 message (i.e. if it's always the same.....why send it?) We are getting this (look for "folding") after mucho shoving into the new HL7 XML ITS R2. > Much like the knowledge of physics has evolved since Issac Newton, the > knowledge of information science has evolved since Claude Shannon. Most > of this work has been done under the umbrella of Philosophy. > > One of the most comprehensive yet concise documents I have found in this > area is in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: > http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/information-semantic/ > > I do believe that the use of the term ?semantic information? is > unfortunate because (IMHO) information by definition must have semantic > integrity. But that point we'll leave to the philosophers. :-> > > & politicians...& earnest english language students. > How this applies to healthcare is that healthcare information must > contain truth. That truth is fully dependent on the complete context of > where, when and how it was recorded. This context needs to be > understood in all spatial and temporal instances where this information > is or may need to be used. An obvious response would be that Heisenberg would argue with the above. Wrt being understood.....I take it doctor's notes in a text box are verboten then as If I go to Finland & have to go see a doctor & he enters a record which is accessible back here in the UK, the coding can be used to tell my clinician things but unless I get lucky & my doctor understands Finnish.... > I am certain that the openEHR Reference > Model and the Archetype Object Model definitions are currently > incomplete. Some things we know about and some we have yet to learn. > But I can almost assure you that they will grow even more complex over > time. > > I have 0 (nada, zero null, no) problem with the AOM. Having delved into both HL7 & OpenEHR in some depth I have to say I prefer the OpenEHR model. However the whole point of an object model (as opposed to an object implementation) is that it is implementation neutral. > If you can show that the XML family can meet these needs and be more > understandable and functional than ADL I will be one of the first to > jump on board. My favorite language is Python. It has one of if not > the best sets of tools for manipulating XML. > > BTW As an aside: I note from : http://linuxmednews.com/1005015308/index_html That you are keen on OSS & once more would just like to draw your attention to: http://www.bjhcim.co.uk/news/2008/n804023.htm "The open source developer community, Open Health Tools (OHT), has announced a collaborative effort to develop common healthcare IT products and services. Its 26 members consist of national health agencies, government-funded organisations and agencies, major healthcare providers, international standards organisations and companies from Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States. The members include NHS Connecting for Health (CfH), BT, IBM, Oracle and HL7, among others. Formed in November 2007, OHT's mission is to provide software tools and components that will accelerate the implementation of electronic health information interoperability platforms, which improve patient quality of care, safety and access to electronic health records (EHR). The results will be available under an open source agreement so anyone may use them to provide interoperable healthcare platforms that will link clinics, hospitals, pharmacies and other points of care to make healthcare systems more efficient. OHT's health interoperability framework will use standardised, open interfaces and a set of reusable software components that can be assembled into systems and products by health systems and vendors." I obvious appologise for : "As part of its commitment to OHT, NHS Connecting for Health has contributed an XML processing engine" <G> > [NOTE] You will also need to address the issues that Thomas Beale just > presented, in the referenced thread, regarding the real world as well. > > I have done so. Adam ********************************************************************** This message may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient please accept our apologies. Please do not disclose, copy or distribute information in this e-mail or take any action in reliance on its contents: to do so is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Please inform us that this message has gone astray before deleting it. Thank you for your co-operation. NHSmail is used daily by over 100,000 staff in the NHS. Over a million messages are sent every day by the system. To find out why more and more NHS personnel are switching to this NHS Connecting for Health system please visit www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/nhsmail **********************************************************************
