The draft spec for 1.5 knowledge identifiers can be accessed via http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/spec/Development+and+Governance+of+Knowledge+Artefacts
The '-' based specialisation syntax is proposed to be dropped, as it became very unweildy once you srart to consider how to handle namespaces within specialisations , particularly when the specialisation has a different namespace to the parent. It gets even more confusing when you add in the requirements for templates and complex archetypes i.e aggregations. To get around the querying problem that Erik describes, it is proposed to carry the specialisation inheritance list in the data. Archetype identifiers are separate from filenames, but in practice, archetypes and templates do find themselves expressed as individual files on filesystems and it can be all too easy for versions/ namespaces to get mixed up, if the file names do not carry the same sort of uniqueness as is embodied in the offical archetype_id. >From Idenitifer document 5.3.3 The other possibility is to include archetype lineage information in the data itself. This could be a modified form of the identifier reference in the case of specialised archetypes to allow lineage information to be stored. TBD_14: proposed RM change: ARCHETYPED.archteype_id -> List[ARCHETYPE_ID]; in LOCATABLE, just continue to use the direct archetype id as currently done. The simplest form of this would be as a list of operational identifiers, e.g. se.skl.epj::openEHR-EHR-EVALUATION.genetic_diagnosis.v1.12, org.openehr.ehr::openEHR-EHR-EVALUATION.diagnosis.v1.29, org.openehr.ehr::openEHR-EHR-EVALUATION.problem.v2.4 Ian Dr Ian McNicoll office / fax? +44(0)1536 414994 mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 skype ianmcnicoll ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com Clinical analyst,?Ocean Informatics openEHR Clinical Knowledge Editor www.openehr.org/knowledge Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL BCS Primary Health Care SG Group www.phcsg.org On 28 October 2010 09:46, Diego Bosc? <yampeku at gmail.com> wrote: > Shouldn't archetype identifiers and file names be separated? > > 2010/10/28 Peter Gummer <peter.gummer at oceaninformatics.com>: >> Erik Sundvall wrote: >> >>> openEHR-EHR-EVALUATION.problem.v1.adls >>> ? openEHR-EHR-EVALUATION.diagnosis.v1.adls >>> ? ? ?openEHR-EHR-EVALUATION.diagnosis_sweden.v1.adls >>> openEHR-EHR-LINK.indication.v1.adls >>> >>> Should not the identifiers instead be: >>> >>> openEHR-EHR-EVALUATION.problem.v1.adls >>> ? openEHR-EHR-EVALUATION.problem-diagnosis.v1.adls >>> ? ? ?openEHR-EHR-EVALUATION.problem-diagnosis-sweden.v1.adls >>> openEHR-EHR-LINK.indication.v1.adls >>> >>> Or have the identifier syntax and semantics requirements changed in >>> ADL/AOM 1.5? >> >> This has changed in ADL 1.5. The hyphen is no longer used. >> >> I'm sure I remember Thomas starting a discussion about this on the >> mailing list about a year ago. >> >> - Peter Gummer >> >> _______________________________________________ >> openEHR-technical mailing list >> openEHR-technical at openehr.org >> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical >> > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical >
