> 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)

I am going through the 1.1 release candidate changes and it appears
that some of these are going to be 'breaking' changes to the
schema. So our plan for handling the 1.0.2 schema should have
an eye out to 1.1, which will need to be handled in a
somewhat compatible manner..

> 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?

I don't think the version id etc _inside_ the schema file is too
important - I worry a great deal about the XML instances that are out
there and how instances can be automatically matched up to their
corresponding schema files. That to me is the fundamental issue.
I would contend that 1.1 will require a change to the schema
namespace to "http://schemas.openehr.org/v1.1"; or
"http://schemas.openehr.org/v2"; or "http://schemas.openehr.org/2008/12";
 (if we decide to break
the correspondance between schema set version and openehr
release version)

I do not know how the instance versioning will work with
multiple indepedant schemas (I presume Thomas is referring
to the Template schema vs AM schema etc). I think schemas
need to be released in a "set" that is consistent and whole
- so would prefer that the template/AM/RM schema are all
released at the same time with the same schema namespace
(even if the individual schema files document different
"releases" of their own specs)

Andrew

Reply via email to