On 13/11/2010 00:07, pablo pazos wrote: > Hi, > > I would also concur with your statements about the ENTRY sub > types, as Sam mentioned we have built an INSTRUCTION index that > tracks the current state/care flow step of instructions and their > associated ACTIONs providing efficient access to this information. > > > This complexity may be tackled with a good Service Model ,when it's > completed. I think that we are looking too much at the model to solve > all our problems, but we have a Service Model in draft status that can > help to solve issues on the using of the model. > * * this is a good point actually. The general idea for things like the Instruction Index is to make it a combination of specific openEHR structures, and rules for using those structures (e.g. about where/when LINKs have to be created etc). To make this properly useful, the structures and rules should be mostly hidden, and instead a business service exposed, specific to this function, which we can think of as 'care plans'. There are other services/APIs that can be defined for specific business purposes as well, which enable the application programmer to easily create and interrogate complex underlying data. Hopefully we will see a draft description of the Instruction Index, and some ideas for APIs like 'care plan' and so on. It would be very interesting to see other service models in this area.
- thomas beale -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20101115/d3748a1f/attachment.html>
