So then all they have to do is to create as good stuff as openEHR does ha ;) Don't tell this - I'm a board member of HL7 NZ :) I'd like to see this as a big step towards 'consolidation' of eHealth standards (heard from Ed when he was here and agree)...I don't believe in harmonisation as neither do I support the idea of mappings etc. I can't think of any better global platform to embrace other cool stuff required for 'healthy' working of systems - why not openEHR?
Cheers, -koray -----Original Message----- From: openehr-technical-bounces at lists.openehr.org [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bert Verhees Sent: Wednesday, 5 September 2012 9:44 a.m. To: For openEHR technical discussions Subject: Re: HL7 opens up On 04-09-12 20:06, Diego Bosc? wrote: > The big question is, how does it affect us? HL7 is primary a way of messaging. In the Netherlands HL7 is very important, as message format. All (I mean ALL) the underlying systems which create the messages have legacy datamodel-storage. There is no such thing as an HL7v3 storage system on the dutch market. Also an OpenEHR system can create HL7 messages, especially those message-definitions which are created for the Netherlands, which are created with focus on interoperability, to get all the legacy-systems possible to join. So, I see no big change for the Dutch market. Anyway, costs were never an issue. HL7 is also a storage concept, and I have been to some HL7-meetings, where they discuss these kind of things. Without any hesitation, I saw people admiring HL7 systems which needed 50 to 100 tables to store their thing, and which auto-created SQL-statements from 250!!! lines to query the thing. That is not my way to go, especially if the purpose is interoperability by creating the specially defined RMIM-messages, which are written with focus on legacy to incorporate in the messaging-EPD. As I know the market in the Netherlands, I know it well, my expectation is that legacy will dominate the progression next ten years, or even longer. We even have systems which are just five years ago ported to 32 bits Windows (from 16 bits), and still use an old fashioned API-based database. This is one of the richest healthcare-environments in the world. That is what is going on. So HL7 for free, nice, we can conform to the message-definitions for free, and if system-builders succeed in free themselves from their academic way of software-constructing and legacy and can use HL7 constructs to store their data quick, they have an easy way for creating the messages. (Hey HL7 folks, the secret for you is XPath, oops, now I gave away the secret.) Fine. Let a thousand flowers bloom. When we are confident in our own software, there is nothing to fear from HL7. That is my opinion. kind regards Bert Verhees > > 2012/9/4 Timothy Cook <timothywayne.cook at gmail.com>: >> Finally: >> http://www.hl7.org/about/faqs/FreeIP.cfm >> >> >> >> -- >> ============================================ >> Timothy Cook, MSc +55 21 94711995 >> MLHIM http://www.mlhim.org >> LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook >> Skype ID == timothy.cook >> Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook >> >> _______________________________________________ >> openEHR-technical mailing list >> openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org >> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.ope >> nehr.org > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.open > ehr.org > _______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 7446 (20120904) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 7446 (20120904) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com
