Hi Bert, I appreciate you will be currently using ADL1.4, but in essence, by aggregating archetypes as you suggest, you are creating a template. ADL 1.4 does not define this aggregation/template behaviour, which is why I pointed you to the ADL1.5 specs, which cover both the templates and specialised archetypes. We, therefore do not have an official ADL1.4 answer to your question but your final statement is correct :
The archetype-node-id in a locatable constructed around an archetype in an archetypeslot is the archetype-node-id it gets from its own archetype (which is called in the slot). The archetype-node-id in a locatable constructed around the archetype calling the archetypeslot is to be ignored. Also remember that there is no absolute requirement for a single slot to have an atnode name but Heather and I now pretty well always assign one routinely as it helps document the usage of the slot for downstream users. Ian Dr Ian McNicoll office / fax +44(0)141 560 4657 mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 skype ianmcnicoll ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com ian at mcmi.co.uk Clinical Analyst Ocean Informatics Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, University College London openEHR Archetype Editorial Group Member BCS Primary Health Care SG Group www.phcsg.org / BCS Health Scotland On 23 August 2010 11:51, Bert Verhees <bert.verhees at rosa.nl> wrote: > Thanks Ian, > > I will not surprise you that I don't work with ADL 1.5. > So I have to understand your answer to this issue in ADL 1.4 context. > > Archetypeslots are typically very convenient in templates, but also in > archetypes. > > In archetypes, the convenience is it makes it possible for easily archetype > (code)-reuse. > But in an archetype the approach is different because the locatable > constructed around the archetype (in the slot) is a property from the > locatable constructed around the archetype which calls the archetype(slot). > (sorry the express this so complicated, I don't know a more simpler way to > say this) > > This is not the case in a template, because they serve another purpose. > > I must confess, in my software I do not use templates, for now, but I will > in the next release. > So the only purpose for me for archetype-slots is as a part of an > archetype. > > Please correct me if I state following wrong: > > The archetype-node-id in a locatable constructed around an archetype in an > archetypeslot is the archetype-node-id it gets from its own archetype (which > is called in the slot). > The archetype-node-id in a locatable constructed around the archetype > calling the archetypeslot is to be ignored. > > Is this correct? > > Thanks, Bert > > > > > Op 22-08-10 15:27, Ian McNicoll schreef: > > Hi Bert, > > This is essentially a template, with the slot 'filled' by an archetype > reference, and is defined in the forthcoming ADL AOM 1.5 specifications > > http://www.openehr.org/300-OE.html?branch=1&language=1 > > http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/spec/openEHR+Templates+and+Specialised+Archetypes > > use_archetype OBSERVATION[openEHR-EHR-OBSERVATION.blood_pressure.v1] ? { > /items ? { > use_archetype EVALUATION[at0001, > org.openehr::openEHR-EHR-OBSERVATION.blood_pressure.v1] > } > } > > > In the resultant template, the atNode of the filler/called archetype > (at0000) , identifies the 'filled slot' node, not the parent/caller (at0001) > but is always qualified by the archetypeID > > FROM EHR [ehr_id/value=$ehrUid] CONTAINS COMPOSITION > [openEHR-EHR-COMPOSITION.encounter.v1] > CONTAINS OBSERVATION obs [openEHR-EHR-OBSERVATION.blood_pressure.v1] > WHERE obs/data[at0001]/events[at0006]/data[at0003]/items[at0004]/value/value > >= 140 > > Note too that, specialised archetypes also support the same mechanism of > filled lots, which allows compound archetypes to be defined i.e with some > pre-filled slots. > > Ian > > Dr Ian McNicoll > office / fax +44(0)141 560 4657 > mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 > skype ianmcnicoll > ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com > ian at mcmi.co.uk > > Clinical Analyst Ocean Informatics > Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, University College London > openEHR Archetype Editorial Group > Member BCS Primary Health Care SG Group www.phcsg.org / BCS Health > Scotland > > > > On 22 August 2010 13:04, Bert Verhees <bert.verhees at rosa.nl> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Excuse me if (I) asked before, it stills keeps puzzling me. >> >> >> When we have this archetype-definition (this from Rong's repository from >> test-archetypes for the adl-parser) >> ---------------- >> definition >> Entry[at0000] matches { -- Encounter >> content matches { >> allow_archetype CARE_ENTRY [at0001] occurrences matches >> {0..1} matches { >> include >> domain_concept matches {/blood_pressure.v1/} >> exclude >> domain_concept matches {/blood_pressure.v2/} >> domain_concept matches {/.*/} >> } >> } >> } >> -------------- >> Imagine the allowed archetype definition to blood-pressure is like >> >> definition >> OBSERVATION[at0000] matches { -- Blood Pressure >> data matches { >> HISTORY[at0001] matches { -- history >> events cardinality matches {1..*; unordered} matches { >> EVENT[at0006] occurrences matches {0..*} matches >> { -- any event >> data matches { >> ITEM_LIST[at0003] matches { -- blood >> pressure >> items cardinality matches {0..*; >> unordered} matches { >> ELEMENT[at0004] occurrences matches >> {0..1} matches { -- Systolic >> value matches { >> DV_QUANTITY < >> property = <[openehr::125]> >> list = < >> ["1"] = < >> units = <"mm[Hg]"> >> magnitude = >> <|0.0..<1000.0|> >> precision = <|0|> >> > >> > >> > >> } >> } >> } >> } >> } >> } >> } >> } >> } >> } >> >> >> We can see, there is an archetypeNodeId to this archetypeslot (at0001). >> And in the called archetype there is also a archetypeNodeId (at0000) >> >> In fact, the careentry has two archetypeNodeId's, one from the calling >> archetype and one from the called archetype. >> ----------------- >> >> Imagine there is an data object to the Entry which has the Care-Entry >> worked out. What will be the archetypeNodeId to this CareEntry in a dadl >> which represents these data completely worked out. >> >> What will be the AQL which represents a query to a specific leaf-node in >> the care-Entry, or are there two queries both possible for the same >> leaf-node? >> In that case, the situation differs from normal RM-Objects, because an >> RM-object can only have one archetypeNodeID. >> >> SO, please, help, a link to an explaining text somewhere will also do. >> >> Thanks very much, and kind regards >> Bert Verhees >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> openEHR-technical mailing list >> openEHR-technical at openehr.org >> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical >> > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing listopenEHR-technical at > openehr.orghttp://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20100823/898b6785/attachment.html>
