visible, allowed types, icon...
2012/1/13 Thomas Beale <thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com>:
>
> Hi Diego
>
> On 11/01/2012 03:12, Diego Bosc? wrote:
>> If it is really needed for the moment for representing templates then
>> it's OK with me (as long as we agree that this is a temporal thing),
>> but I still feel that having two separated places to rule UI
>> generation is a bad idea.
>> I think that annotations could work for you (even creating a new
>> specific ADL section would).
>
> technically, the annotations might work - it depends on how much needs
> to be said, because the annotations are not very powerful in terms of
> structure or semantic expressions - they are after all designed to be
> 'notes' of some kind. But the real problem is likely to be that for a
> given archetype (most likely national or local ones) or template (e.g. a
> national one for discharge summary), there are more than one UI template
> 'overlay' - e.g. let's say you have a Spanish template & some e-health
> groups in Andalusia & Galicia regions want different UIs. That means
> multiple UI-templates.
>
>> We currently have all the GUI directives for representation in a
>> documentation file for each reference model (as you can see in this
>> screen capture http://i.imgur.com/tQxRt.png).
>
> I don't understand which of these settings inn the right hand group is
> too do with UI rendering of the data...?
>
> - thomas
> _______________________________________________
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
