Hi Thomas, That makes a lot of sense in my opinion. Don't think it will be a major problem, at least in the Java space this particular change in ADL 1.5 is not worrying me as there are others that are a lot more fundamental.
Not sure if this change would has an impact on the canonical MD5 hash generated by the Archetype Editor - ideally it would be the same for an archetype with or without the concept clause? Sebastian Thomas Beale wrote: > > In all archetypes that I have ever seen, the 'concept' at the top of > the archetype is always the at-code of the root object constraint of > the archetype. It would make sense to turn this into a function, and > remove this clause from archetypes & templates. In fact, the concept > code is by definition the node_id of the root object. In ADL 1.5, the > root object must hae a node_id, according to the following rule: > > * VACCD: archetype definition code validity. The node identifier > of the root node of the definition section must be the concept > code mentioned earlier in the archetype. > > So... it seems logical to remove it from the archetype as data, and > change the 'concept' property to a function which simply retrieves the > node_id of the root object. > > It seems to be that this would be a useful change to put into ADL 1.5. > Would this impact badly on tools and parsers? I think that most > parsers could be left as they are, and so could most archetypes; the > 'concept' clause would be sliently ignored in future. New ADL 1.5 > archetypes being created would have no concept clause. > > - thomas beale > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > 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/20100705/77f5f798/attachment.html>
