David, Diego,
I just tried to compile the archetype
CEN-DEMOGRAPHIC-IDENTIFIED_HEALTHCARE_PROFESSIONAL.HCP_Dispenser.v1 in
the ADL Workbench... I had to make a few changes:
* IDENTIFIED_HEALTHCARE_PROFESSIONAL has an attribute
'scopingOrganisation' in the standard, but the archetype had
'scoping_organisation' (the standard bizarrely mixes camelCase and
underscore_form)
* HEALTHCARE_PROFESSIONAL_ROLE has an attribute 'specialty' in the
standard, but it was called 'speciality' in the archetype
(admittedly an easy confusion in English)
At the moment, the version of the 13606 and 21090 schemas available
inthe openEHR SVN has the strange mix of attribute name styles in the
published standard. The archetypes have used a consistent naming
approach - the more_readable_form, from my point of view. What is the
consensus on this aspect of the standard? Do we follow it slavishly or
use a modified variant, as you have presumably done for your epSOS work?
It may be that my copy of 13606 is out of date, and was superseded by
some later update - I have a version from 2006-06-13. Were there later
changes?
- thomas
On 09/09/2011 19:04, David Moner wrote:
>
> Thomas,
>
> Could you please clarify this sentence?
>
> I'm the main author of that document. As you said, it is a 45 pages
> document of which only two and a half are a summary description of ADL
> to understand the proposed archetypes. And only there we can see some
> examples of ADL structures (yes, openEHR ones) taken directly from
> EN13606-2, which is the norm referenced at the document, and not from
> the openEHR specifications.
>
> I really think that your affirmation is misleading and unfair.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20110909/13689bc0/attachment.html>
