Hello Sebastian Thank you for your response.
A couple of quick comments: Yes, the archetype that you are linking is the one i am referring to. "any_allowed" as an attribute could be inherited from C_DEFINED_OBJECT from http://www.openehr.org/svn/specification/TRUNK/publishing/architecture/am/aom1.4.pdf (page 27)...It is of course also referred to as a function in C_PRIMITIVE_OBJECT but it has the indication (effected) (?) page 28 on the same document) All the best Athanasios Anastasiou On 28/03/2012 16:44, Sebastian Garde wrote: > > > On 28.03.2012 14:47, Athanasios Anastasiou wrote: >> Hello everyone >> >> I keep getting an error when parsing this ecg archetype (expressed as >> XML) and i was wondering if this could be because the archetype was >> uploaded to the CKM when the CKM used a different version of the >> published openEHR XSDs, if this used to be a bug of the archetype >> editor or if it could be something that i am doing wrong. > No - the xml in CKM is produced on the fly from the adl, so it is always > up to date... > But of course not necessarily always correct: There may well a bug in > the generation process of the Java XML generator, > but can someone say definitely if the any_allowed tag should be in the > xml or not, first? > (any_allowed is an operation, not an attribute in the constraint model) > > Many archetypes have this in CKM, e.g. when a DV_TEXT is not further > constrained, this would be expressed in XML using the any_allowed tag. > > I assume you refer to this archetype? > http://openehr.org/knowledge/OKM.html#showarchetype_1013.1.276 > > Sebastian > >> >> The error i keep getting is "unrecognised element" for <any_allowed>. >> >> In fact, in my small local collection of archetypes*, this archetype >> is the only one that has an <any_allowed> element as part of its >> C_COMPLEX_OBJECT definitions. >> >> If i remove <any_allowed>, the archetype is parsed without any >> problems, but that's usually a way to create problems, not solve them :-) >> >> I would really like to use this ECG archetype as a test case because >> it contains a large number of definitions. >> >> According to the specs C_COMPLEX_OBJECT is supposed to inherit >> "any_allowed" by C_DEFINED_OBJECT but the "Archetype.xsd" does not >> contain an element / attribute definition for <any_allowed> in any of >> the relevant class definitions. >> >> This is why i suspect come kind of a (possibly older) mismatch between >> the CKM / Archetype editor code and the XSDs. > >> >> What do you think? >> >> Could this be related to this item as well? >> http://www.openehr.org/mailarchives/openehr-technical/msg05970.html >> >> I suppose i can safely remove <any_allowed> (?) >> >> Looking forward to hearing from you >> Athanasios Anastasiou >> >> P.S. (*) The 7 Archetypes i am interested in: (encounter, >> menstrual_cycle_day, blood_pressure, body_temperature, >> body_weight_adjusted, ecg, height) >> >> _______________________________________________ >> openEHR-technical mailing list >> openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org >> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org >> >> > > -- > *Dr. Sebastian Garde* > /Dr. sc. hum., Dipl.-Inform. Med, FACHI/ > Senior Developer > Ocean Informatics > > Skype: gardeseb
