On 05/01/2012 08:54, Diego Bosc? wrote:
> Put a couple of comments on the wiki, but I think it is a thing that
> should be discussed on the list.
> In ADL 1.5 a flag 'pass_through'  was added. Its definition is 'Allows
> nodes required for structuring data but otherwise redundant for screen
> display and reporting to be detected by rendering software'. So now we
> have a GUI directive on the ADL. Shouldn't this be a part of the
> reference model information (if it is never supposed to be displayed)
> or part of a 'visualization template' (another different level).
> I would say that more information about visualization will be needed,
> and having visualization information separated between two different
> places feels like a bad design move.

In general I am inclined to agree, and I have to say I have been in two 
minds about having this attribute in there. I am convinced by clinical 
modellers who say that something is needed to control interior tree 
nodes not appearing on the GUI (indeed, it is visual pollution). And - 
even if the template were being used to build a message definition 
(generated XSD or similar), and the data were processed into some report 
or other output, this attribute would be respected (technically, this is 
still 'user interface').

I know the passthrough attribute is used often from the current .oet 
template usage, so we need a way of dealing with the requirement. If we 
take it out, and say it is a GUI directive, the problem is we currently 
have no formal framework for that yet. Maybe the lesser of two evils is 
to do what Koray (I think?) said, and make it a special kind of 
annotation. I have implemented annotations in ADL/AOM 1.5, and they work 
nicely. We need to agree on some kind of standard representation, e.g.



I originally didn't like this approach (I still don't really) but we 
have to be realistic and it's not the end of the world to bootstrap like 
this. As you can see it is 'soft programming', so error-prone, but it 
can obviously be made to work, and isn't hard to implement. However, now 
rendering software has to know to look for "ui" annotations and do 
sensible things with them.

thoughts?

- thomas

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20120109/b95561fd/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: fdcdijfa.png
Type: image/png
Size: 8902 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20120109/b95561fd/attachment.png>

Reply via email to