On 25/03/2011 03:05, Koray Atalag wrote: > > Hi Eric, good points...As you may remember we had this discussion on > this list not so long ago and I don't remember any action taken after > that. I guess we should take lead and come up with some proposal. > Perhaps it'd be good to have a wiki space - but I want to repeat > myself: someone from core group must guide the group and provide early > feedback whether we are on the right track or not. >
To all interested in this area: in terms of innovation and ideas, the people in this discussion are the 'core group'. Advice from myself and others historically working on the specifications is as I have already posted, i.e. IMO, stick to the separation of concerns with respect to artefacts. I personally would not include GUI-related hints in templates either, because there will eventually emerge some templates that are widely shared, e.g. national and international (e.g. European) discharge summary, referral, e-prescription etc - but whose GUI models are very unlikely to be shared. On that view of things, you don't want to have to revise such a published resource due to some particular GUI directives buried inside it. This doesn't mean that the ADL (abstract or XML form) formalism can't be used, but I still think a separation of the pieces will make dependency and release management a lot easier. Erik may be right: if the GUI hints can be expressed in a template, then by definition, it can be done in a specialised template, and that can clearly be local. At the moment, we have to consider this area as 'industrial research', and I for one would encourage all experimentation to be published and flagged on this list, as a way of getting us all on the same page with respect to lessons being learned. - thomas beale* * -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20110325/3ae62633/attachment.html>
