> 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. > Exactly that is what I am doing, and to not reinvent wheels unnecessarily, I am calling others to help do it. Because, I am already figuring out how to do it, others can share and use my experience, and hopefully, I can learn from others.
What I don't need is a discussion on *IF* we should build an API, but I need a discussion on *HOW* to build an API. It seems to me that this forum is the right place to find people which eventually want to do this. If not here, where then should I look? It would be a sad situation if there is worldwide no one to find, who want to build on a *complete* Openehr implementation on open source base. I do not want to say anything bad about Rong and friends, in this, because, I cannot stress enough, he (they) have done a very good and necessary job. But it is not finished, and that is what is needed to be done. But there are some problems with using the ref_impl_java as it is to a persistence-API, the problems I found will reflect automatically, and need to be solved. I solved them, but I don't know if it is the best way, and what is more, I cannot use the code from ref_impl_java, because I have a fork, and must always rewrite. For this I want a solution, and I think, when building an API, this solution will come automatically, and find its way to the kernel. So there will be something in it for others (they get a API to persistence), and something for me, and also others, some problems will be solved. But I am not going to do the first step, because, there is no one who is wanting to help, and an Open Source project from one person is small, it can stay in my house. Then publishing is of no use to me. Bert
