On 14/06/2013 12:31, Daniel Karlsson wrote: > Gerard, Ian, Thomas, thanks for all answers. > > On Fri, 2013-06-14 at 11:17 +0100, Thomas Beale wrote: >> > Such a standard TDS/TDD would have made the Swedish 2009-10 quality > registry project significantly easier and a lot of the criticism towards > openEHR could have been rejected.
as I am sure you know, we offered exactly this path to them in 2010 (it had already been running for a couple of years by then)... I am not sure what happened, but it wasn't taken up. I am pretty sure we actually supplied example TDSs, and the Template Designer (which was in use then) could be used to generate this transform on demand (i.e. no special input needed from anyone). > We more or less constantly had to > reply to questions as to why use archtypes/templates using up several > kilobytes when anyone can write an XSD for a specific use case using up > a fraction of that space. The obvious conclusion is that we (as in > Sweden) ourselves should have started that project. It's not always easy > being an openEHR advocate ;). true ;-) I think the lesson we needed to learn (are still learning) is not to improve the technology, but to improve the educational materials. I look forward to seeing more community input on that in the future. - thomas
