> Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:16:20 +0200 > From: hepabolu <hepabolu at gmail.com> > Subject: Re: Issues around UI technologies and bindings to back end > To: For openEHR technical discussions <openehr-technical at openehr.org> > Message-ID: <4A671124.7020002 at gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Seref Arikan said the following on 22/7/09 11:39: > > Now about UI - model relationship, my view is the GUI layer is way too > > complex and diverse to include in openEHR specifications, even a subset > > of the UI related stuff would be enough to introduce more problems than > > it solves. > > IF there emerges a cross platform AND cross technology declerative > > markup for GUI and GUI interactions and bindings, and this is a big if, > > then it may be considered, otherwise, my personal opinion is to simply >
I agree, to start integrating UI related content into the archetypes is a very bad idea. Most modern UIs follow a Model-View-Controller<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model%E2%80%93view%E2%80%93controller>approach. For PatientOS Archetypes provide the data elements. The relationships and constraints within the archetype data elements is implemented in our model. We have different views - fat client, web client which are implemented through controllers written in java or javascript. Atttempts to push everything into the archetype definition would create a complex beast which would defeat KISS principal. As a side note I also think the ADL files is hampering adoption - not for us as there is a Java parser. Since everything that is the ADL must be expressable in XML (otherwise interoperability of the definitions would be problematic) - why have both - XML is ubiquitous and I think the benefits of readibility of an ADL file is no longer needed since there are tools which replace it - how many people read an ADL file any more? -- Gregory Caulton Principal at PatientOS Inc. personal email: caultonpos at gmail.com http://www.patientos.com corporate: (888)-NBR-1EMR || fax 857.241.3022 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20090723/06735c3c/attachment.html>
