For one or another reason a part of the text in my reply is 'meshed' up when I receive it back via the mailinglist. The first sentence of my reply was intended to be:
What has happened? For years and years you have been the initiator of many disputes between 13606/openEHR and HL7 and now all over sudden openEHR seems to have become the 'enemy'. I hope it shows up correctly this time. Does anybody know why/how this 'mesh-up' happens? Begin doorgestuurd bericht: > Van: Stef Verlinden <stef at vivici.nl> > Datum: 10 februari 2010 13:05:01 GMT+01:00 > Aan: For openEHR technical discussions <openehr-technical at chime.ucl.ac.uk> > Onderwerp: Antw.: Interoperability with HL7 > > > Op 10 feb 2010, om 11:37 heeft Gerard Freriks het volgende geschreven: > >> It is imperative that DCM's are absolutely free to use and in the public >> domain. CEN/ISO and ANSI assure that with the standardisation IP rules in >> general. >> DCM's must be absolutely free from IP problems, well maintained in a formal, >> flexible, organisation, owned and controlled by all that use them. >> OpenEHR as we know it today is a private company. (See under Status: >> http://www.openehr.org/about/foundation.html) > > Hi Gerard, > > > What has happened? For years and years you have been the initiator of many > disputes between 13606/openEHR and HL7 and now all over sudden openEHR seems > to have become the 'enemy'. > > OpenEHR is a not-for profit organisation and it's knowlegde is in the open > domain. If you had Googled around a litte bit you could have found the > following: > > A company limited by guarantee is an alternative type of incorporation used > primarily for non-profit organisations that require corporate status. A > guarantee company does not have a share capital, but has members who are > guarantors instead of shareholders. The guarantors give an undertaking to > contribute a nominal amount towards the winding up of the company in the > event of a shortfall upon cessation of business. It cannot distribute its > profits to its members, and is therefore eligible to apply for charitable > status if necessary. > > So I would like you to withdraw this unfunded accusation or provide some > solid facts to prove the contrary. This really doesn't help the discussion. > > I do like the fact that you've turned around and see opportunities to > harmonize HL7, 13606 and openEHR, so let's keep working on that track. > > > Cheers, > > > Stef > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20100210/e433e686/attachment.html>
