Hi Ian, We develop web based systems because we are web developers. In my case I have started my programming skills on web based systems, and now I have learned a lot of tools, frameworks and web standards and I have very little experience on desktop based tools.
Said that, I think desktop based tools have the same value and usability as the web based ones. There are tools that by nature have to be web based, but other tools like the template editor is ok on desktop. I have the dream that one day I open just one program (a web browser) and get free access to all the archetypes and templates available in the cloud (multiple CKMs), and may create, edit and share those artefacts also online. Sometimes I think about something like an openEHR facebook, where archetypes are people, templates are groups, and all are related by slots (friend relationships). This is just a dream... -- Kind regards, Ing. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos > From: Ian.McNicoll at oceaninformatics.com > Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2011 16:10:10 +0100 > Subject: openEHR Transition: Web-based tools? > To: openehr-technical at openehr.org > > Hi all, > > One of the suggestions in the White Paper which appears to have > universal support is a move to support much more open-source tools > development. Clearly some tooling must be web-based e.g repository > management and associated formal and informal discussion e.g. CKM and > any new community repository. > > However, I am much less clear on why we might need web-based primary > authoring tools for archetypes and templates. Diego, Pablo and Sam are > all keen on this approach but I remain unconvinced that this is really > a key requirement, given that archetype authoring is in essence a > solitary activity much like any other code development. By all means > build in much better integration with repositories and other > mechanisms to allow joint working, but even with modern javascript > libraries and Flex-style components, HTML-based tooling just feels > like it adds a layer of development complexity and probably some > usability-clunkiness which is not offset by the benefits. > > Maybe I am just an old-timer but having waited for may years to get > the kind of development environment that Visual Studio, Eclipse and > equivalents bring, and that I think is equally required for archetype > development, I am loathe for us to get slowed-down by insisting on a > 'web-based'. > > What do others think? > > Ian > > Dr Ian McNicoll > office +44 (0)1536 414 994 > fax +44 (0)1536 516317 > mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 > skype ianmcnicoll > ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com > > Clinical Modelling Consultant, Ocean Informatics, UK > openEHR Clinical Knowledge Editor www.openehr.org/knowledge > Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL > BCS Primary Health Care www.phcsg.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20110910/b1bca7a3/attachment.html>
