Hi! On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 1:03 PM, Oxford Partnership <oxfordpartnership at googlemail.com> wrote: > If I am understand you correctly, then : > - No attributes within an OpenEHR class can be assumed to be mandatory > within the XML representations, as in all cases the RM can be defaulted to.
I guess you mean attributes of an OpenEHR _RM_ class within XML representations of _archetypes_. (Some things in the AM are mandatory in archetypes.) In the XML representations of _archetypes_ I don't think any RM attributes are _mandatory_ but an "empty" archetype would be of limited value... (I hope others correct me if I've overlooked something.) In the XML representations of (possibly archetyped) _patient data_ all mandatory RM attributes will of course be mandatory and present in the XML. If archetypes add even more mandatory attributes then those will of course be mandatory and present in addition to the default mandatory RM attributes. > - The fact that the current tools do not expose or use these attributes, > is a design decision made by the people writing the tools. Well probably often a "decision" in lack of time/resources or (less likely) lacking ideas of good/useful ways to present them. A tool exposing the RM has to deal with both RM and AM in detail and thus takes more time building than dealing with AM only. Sorry if I'm repeating things you consider obvious. Best regards, Erik Sundvall erisu at imt.liu.se http://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/ Tel: +46-13-227579
