Wiliiam,
openEHR 'cooperating more' and not 'reinventing' would have been
impossible without time travel. The openEHR data types were started in
2002, and were in production use in Australia in 2004. Since then nearly
all changes have involved refactorings of functions and abstract types.
If you doubt this, see the revision history of the spec
<http://www.openehr.org/releases/1.0.2/architecture/rm/data_types_im.pdf> and
also the issue tracker
<http://www.openehr.org/issues/browse/SPEC?report=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.project:changelog-panel>.
Computable ordinal for example was in openEHR from the start. When
Grahame was doing his work on 21090, the whole openEHR specifications
and implementations in 5 languages already existed (and in fact he asked
me many things about the openEHR data types at the time, and tried to
incorporate some; most were knocked back by his HL7 sponsors). But
please let's be honest about history. And if you want to accuse people
of non-cooperation, you are looking the wrong way, everyone knows that.
I still want to know why the 21090 spec is:
* essentially an HL7 specification - this is obvious by inspection
to anyone familiar with this space. No-one could possibly have
come up with 21090 as it is today without the starting point being
the HL7v3 data types
* not defined in a normal object-oriented way
* is only optimised for HL7v3 messaging - which is hardly being used
(therefore including multiple attributes not useful to
non-messaging users)
ISO 21090 is a huge missed opportunity.
- thomas
On 07/11/2010 08:14, Williamtfgoossen at cs.com wrote:
> ISO 21090 is a true ISO standard.
>
> It does include a lot of OpenEHR data type specs, except where OpenEHR
> decided to go their own way.
>
> And in the HL7 space some are working on implementing the ISO 21090
> standard in the HL7 models, which is quite a task, not impossible, but
> a lot of work.
>
> ISO 21090 is based on HL7 input yes, but it is definitely not an HL7
> standard.
>
> In particular the Coded Ordinal as in ISO 21090 meets the clinical and
> research requirement of allowing both computations and code and
> display text use for the semantics. That is not present in most HL7 v3
> standards and will cause some upgrading of most messages.
>
> It (ISO 21090) could have been "more" an OpenEHR standard if OpenEHR
> had more cooperated in this space instead of reinventing again their
> own data types.
>
>
> *
> *
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20101107/79a501a1/attachment.html>
