That is exactly what I'm talking about. If you go with ADL, dADL, JSON, YAML, which you are free to do of course, you'll have difficulty in sharing/replicating that implementation.
Sorry, I'm writing these in the middle of a horribly busy day, so I did not go into details, but we're talking about tooling here, to be used with and possibly without human intervention (runtime), and all I'm saying is, if I were to do such tooling, I'd do it with XML. On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Thomas Beale < thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com> wrote: > On 03/07/2012 09:50, Seref Arikan wrote: > > Which I assume will be represented via XSD again, if multiple technologies > are to do the same thing in the same way. > * > * > > > actually, OPTs are not XSDs, they are an XML instance object serialisation > of the AOM XSD. I.e. all OPTs obey the one XSD. I must admit it seems more > obvious to me to go from OPT either in its XML or any other faithful > serialised form (ADL, dADL, JSON, YAML) to RDF than anything else... > > - thomas > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20120703/39938e93/attachment-0001.html>
