Hi Thomas, It is not just governments who will want to use templates to define agreed minimum datasets. At present all decent attempts at interoperability are essentially project-driven and often quite local e.g. Diabetes shared care dataset, Palliative care message, Emergency care summary. The difficulty has always been to ensure that each project does not end up defining variant semantics for the same core concept as they all tend to have slightly differing end-requirements. Templates turn out to be an excellent way to allow these specific use-case datasets to be defined whilst ensuring that the underlying semantics do not end up in silos since they are expressed in the underlying archetypes. Even when semantic differences cannot be resolved, it helps to express genuine disparity within the same archetype e.g differing pain scales, as it helps to concentrate any on-going debate into the enclosed scope of a single archetype.
Ian Dr Ian McNicoll office / fax? +44(0)1536 414994 mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 skype ianmcnicoll ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com Clinical analyst,?Ocean Informatics openEHR Clinical Knowledge Editor www.openehr.org/knowledge Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL BCS Primary Health Care SG Group www.phcsg.org On 1 December 2010 18:43, Thomas Beale <thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com> wrote: > > Yes and no... we used to think that templates would be only local, but it is > now clear that governments want a way to standardise whole data-sets, which > is what an (ADL 1.5) template is - effectively an archetype that grabs bits > of other archetypes and puts them together to create a specific data set, > e.g. mixture of data captured in a specific kind of consultation, or lab > result, or a discharge summary or whatever. These templates are very likely > to be standardised, and offer a much better way to do this than the current > way of doing it which is generally via ad hoc XML schemas. An ADL 1.5 > template can be expressed as an XSD of course, but this is a downstream tool > generated schema, not a hand-designed one. > > Further it turns out that a lot of institutions really do want to share > templates, so a shareable formalism is actually important here. > > The ADL 1.5 spec is moving along ;-) > > I agree with the 'mind-altering' comment. > > - thomas > > On 01/12/2010 18:30, Tim Cook wrote: > > IMO templates are an implementation specific issue and should not be > part of the reference model. Archetypes that express a concept as a > maximal dataset are sufficient for interoperability. Local templates > are just that; local templates. Certain implementations may share > templates between applications but I dare say any attempt to 'standard' > across implementations is wheel-spinning. > > If people are expecting magic pop-out-of-the-box applications then they > are taking something mind-altering. :-) > > My 2 cents, > > Tim > > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > >
