Thanks Thomas. I will resume the reasoning that brought us here: "in some cases" templates will also be shared together with archetypes, then, in my opinion, they should not incorporate GUI related stuff and be only about data constraints.
David 2010/12/3, Thomas Beale <thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com>: > On 03/12/2010 21:01, David Moner wrote: >> >>> #3. The templates you use should only restrict data entry. It should >>> not filter existing data of the same structure. If it does; there goes >>> interoperability. Along with the entire premise for the use of and >>> purpose of archetypes. >> Interesting... If templates are only used for data entry and not for >> data reading and revision that should be stated clearly for all >> developers, since I think it is not said anywhere at the >> specifications, the web or the wiki. Every developer should know that >> (coming back to the topic of this thread) if they hand-code a >> visualization template all that work is only useful for the data >> generated at their own system and not for the data from an external >> one, even if it is using the same archetypes. > > the general idea has always been that data can always be interpreted by > a receiver using just the archetypes declared in the data. I believe > this will continue to be a reliable assumption into the future. However, > with the new style templates, which are essentially just archetypes, it > may be that templates will be shared quite often as well, since the > computing machinery that can deal with archetypes will be able to deal > with ADL 1.5 templates as well (with only very minor upgrades from > today, since we are talking about operational templates, which are > essentially big archetypes). This is not going to add much information, > since the information structures themselves (i.e. the compositional > hierarchy of Composition, Sections, Entries etc) will reflect the > structure of the template that was used. But if the receiver wants to > validate the received data against the template, which is likely to > include a) numerous removed optional items and b) further constrained > coded text fields, then it will need the template. Note that the data as > received must be definition already be valid with respect to the > implicated archetypes, and if the receiver is interested in what the > template says, then it means they probably have some agreement with the > sender institution about using their templates. This will almost > certainly happen with nationally standardised templates for referrals, > discharge summaries and so on. > > In summary: displaying and using the data with just the archetypes used > to build it will be fine, since the data will reflect accurately the > removed optional items, reduced terminology choices etc. Any site > wanting to do processing against the template will undoubtedly be in > some kind of communication with the publisher of the template. > > - thomas > * > * > -- David Moner Cano Grupo de Inform?tica Biom?dica - IBIME Instituto ITACA http://www.ibime.upv.es Universidad Polit?cnica de Valencia (UPV) Camino de Vera, s/n, Edificio G-8, Acceso B, 3? planta Valencia ? 46022 (Espa?a)
