William E Hammond wrote: > There is no HL7. It is an organization with many members. Most people who > believe that HL7 is just message-centric are outside people, plus, I admit, > some are in HL7. In my opinion, the CDA, and certainly level 3, are > templates/archetypes in compositiopn. I further believe that the CDA will > adopt clinical statements. On the other hand, I find that messaging still > has its place. > > Given that, I think openEHR has excellent archetypes that have intellectual > value. In my opinion, there is considerable interest in archetypes in HL7. > I particularly believe the board is committed to this direction. We > certainly have several persons on the board that are strongly committed to > that direction. Thinking HL7 as only message-centric is coupled with v2 of > which there is still a strong following. > I think the furture will be different. > > * With respect to clinical modelling I hope it will. Along with others, I have spent years trying to convince HL7 that single-source modelling was a good idea and worth pursuing. I hope there are enough results around in the various national programmes, commercial products, and universities to convince someone. If we can agree on this we can all move forward much faster.
- thomas *
