We are about to publish Release 1.0.2 of the openEHR specifications. The CRs in this release have necessitated some very small (non-data affecting) changes in the schema BaseTypes.xsd (impact statement of Release 1.0.2 at http://www.openehr.org/svn/specification/BRANCHES/Release-1.0.2-candidate/publishing/release_notes_1.0.2.htm ; published Release 1.0.1 schemas at http://www.openehr.org/releases/1.0.1/its/XML-schema/index.html)
The question has come up as to how changes in versions of the schemas should be identified. Currently the schemas have the following kind of heading: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <!-- openEHR Release 1.0.1 BaseTypes XML schema --> <!-- Authored by Ocean Informatics 2007.04.13 --> <xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"; xmlns="http://schemas.openehr.org/v1"; targetNamespace="http://schemas.openehr.org/v1"; elementFormDefault="qualified" version="v1.0.1" id="BaseTypes.xsd"> Firstly, openEHR publishes a number of schemas, not just one. Each carries only the release id, but not an individual version number. I would argue that they should carry an individual version id (and possibly not the Release number?). Can the XML experts here comment on what the usual way to manage the kind of componentised schemas we use in openEHR is? Should we, as of this release put a per-schema version id in each schema? Secondly, you will notice that these schemas are authored by Ocean Informatics. This has been the case historically (I believe the community understands the 'bootstrap' nature of openEHR development), but of course is unlikely to remain so. Adam Flinton (NHS) and others will certainly propose an improved Archetype.xsd, and most likely similar improvements to the other schemas for forthcoming releases. When this happens, I expect that the 'author' line will change to something like "Authored by openEHR XML Schema project" or similar. However, for this 1.0.2 release, I guess it should stay as is, since at least it allows people to know the author, and who to blame, rather than the schemas being anonymous. Objections to this are welcome of course. I am more concerned to correct the version id situation. All feedback welcomed. - thomas beale
