Hi Bert / Sam, Thanks for your answers. The idea is that the new COMPOSITION will be available to the EHR SYSTEM when it arrives to the SERVER. I understand the difference between finishing a COMPOSITION (e.g. signing and setting the end time) and committing it to be available to the system (e.g. other CLIENTs could access the new COMPOSITION).
I agree with Bert that AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id should be "the system on which the author is working/committing, normally not the server.", but IMO this is the opposite to the current definition of that field. Moreover, if that field is set to the SERVER's ID it will be redundant, because the SERVER knows that the COMPOSITION was committed to itself, but what doesn't knows is the ID of the system where the COMSPOTION was authored (e.g. the SERVER could identify the CLIENT by it's IP, but 1. IP's change, 2. there could be a middleware so the IP received by the SERVER could not be the IP of the CLIENT). What do you think? -- Kind regards, Ing. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez http://cabolabs.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20130123/8885e0bd/attachment.html>
