On 05/12/2010 16:49, Tim Cook wrote: > >> Archetypes contain slots; templates fill them and remove unwanted >> archetype data points (generally most of them in any given template). >> It is a matter for discussion whether templates should ever be allowed >> to add new data points the way an archetype can. > Thanks for these clarifications. They are *very* important points to > consider. > > IMHO, if templates are permitted to add to the constraints published by > an archetype then it changes the basic design paradigm. > > Something to consider very seriously. > > Regards, > Tim
I mostly agree: it just makes it clearer if templates are not adding any more data points. The formalism will in fact allow this, so it will be up to tools to prevent it. That is not hard to do. On the other hand, one could make the same argument about added data items in templates as for purely locally used archetypes: they are of local interest only (e.g. some kind of hospital specific business process study), and have really no meaning whatever outside. I personally think it makes it simpler for everyone to think of templates as only being used for 1. slot-filling 2. removal of unneeded optional data points and 3. tightening of some leaf value constraints, nearly always coded terms. If it turns out that data node additions make sense, we will deal with it when a true need is clear. - thomas * * -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20101205/5cbb0dd9/attachment.html>
