There is a test archetype to show how to do this here
<http://www.openehr.org/svn/knowledge2/TRUNK/archetypes/ADL_1.5_test/validity/c_domain_types/openehr-test_pkg-SOME_TYPE.ordinals.v1.adls>.
It looks like this in the AWB:
Its definition is:
SOME_TYPE[at0000] matches { -- root item
standard_ordinal_attr matches {
DV_ORDINAL [at0004] matches {
value matches {|0|}
symbol matches {
DV_CODED_TEXT matches {
defining_code matches {[local::at0001]} -- +
}
}
}
DV_ORDINAL [at0005] matches {
value matches {|1|}
symbol matches {
DV_CODED_TEXT matches {
defining_code matches {[local::at0002]}
-- ++
}
}
}
DV_ORDINAL [at0006] matches {
value matches {|2|}
symbol matches {
DV_CODED_TEXT matches {
defining_code matches {[local::at0003]}
-- +++
}
}
}
}
clinical_ordinal_attr_1 matches {
0|[local::at0001], -- +
1|[local::at0002], -- ++
2|[local::at0003]; -- +++
0 -- assumed value
}
}
You can treat the local terms like any other terms for the pruposes of
generating the 'value' in data.
- thomas
On 04/04/2012 11:03, Diego Bosc? wrote:
> If you have the following dv_ordinal
>
> value existence matches {1..1} matches {
> 1|[local::at0044],
> 2|[local::at0045],
> 3|[local::at0046]
> }
> }
>
> and you transform it to a standard representation you get something like this:
>
> ...
>
> DV_ORDINAL occurrences matches {0..1} matches { --
> symbol existence matches {1..1} matches {
> DV_CODED_TEXT occurrences matches {0..1} matches { --
> defining_code existence matches {1..1} matches {
> CODE_PHRASE occurrences matches {0..1} matches { --
> terminology_id existence matches {1..1} matches {
> TERMINOLOGY_ID occurrences matches {0..1} matches
> { --
> value existence matches {1..1} matches
> {"local"}
> }
> }
> code_string existence matches {1..1} matches {"at0050"}
> }
> }
> }
> }
> value existence matches {1..1} matches {1}
>
> ...
>
> Taking into account that DV_CODED_TEXT 'value' attribute is
> obligatory, what should be put on that when generating the standard
> representation of an ordinal?
> Specifications say: "For DV_CODED_TEXT, this is the rubric of the
> complete term as provided by the terminology service", but as
> terminology is local so I don't really know if it applies at all in
> this case
>
> Regards
>
> _______________________________________________
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
>
--
Ocean Informatics *Thomas Beale
Chief Technology Officer, Ocean Informatics
<http://www.oceaninformatics.com/>*
Chair Architectural Review Board, /open/EHR Foundation
<http://www.openehr.org/>
Honorary Research Fellow, University College London
<http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/>
Chartered IT Professional Fellow, BCS, British Computer Society
<http://www.bcs.org.uk/>
Health IT blog <http://www.wolandscat.net/>
*
*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20120404/767eee93/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: dadaejcc.png
Type: image/png
Size: 11978 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20120404/767eee93/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ocean_full_small.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5828 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20120404/767eee93/attachment-0001.jpg>
