On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 11:26:23PM +0100, Bert Verhees wrote: > But what we, as community, can do is building an API to which the kernel > can connect, every or most possible persistence solutions should be able > to fit below. > > That is where I would like to help, that is the missing part in OpenEhr > which we can do together, so why don't we? > > Why do discussions die, when they enter this subject? > > I would like to know that. IMO the answer is easy.
Eventually, a good API crystallizes from several (attempted/undertaken) *implementations* of a specification. Implementation means work. Nitty-gritty, non-theoretical work. Day-job bores. There's two kinds of (useful) people (and pray, both are needed) in IT: Those that figure out *how* to do something right (Thomas Beale and his clan). And those that *do* it (Bert and friends). The former, by "design", need more visible communication, it seems to me. The latter "just" need to get down and DO it. The (volunteer/OSS) doers are a minority in my observation. If one wants an implementation to happen one needs to start one (and preferably open source it). From there one can go back and define a sensible API between specs and implementation which will not fall down with the next implementation. My 2 Cents, Karsten -- GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346
