(Posting this here as Ian suggested)
I was looking at the Demonstration archetype and found something strange.
When I look where ac0001 is used in this archetype I feel that too much
implied knowledge is being used.
ELEMENT[at0011] matches { --
Text That is Sourced From an External Terminology
value matches {
DV_CODED_TEXT matches {
defining_code
matches {[ac0001]} -- SubsetA
}
}
}
As defining_code is a CODE_PHRASE, which is an entity with a code and
another entity of TERMINOLOGY_ID type, I don't see how a realistic system
would solve this ac code and assign the different alternatives where
needed.
In theory you can transform a domain type into a standard equivalent form.
Which is the standard equivalent form for this ac0001 constraint?
If we allow this we are forcing the terminology server to deal with simple
constraints (an acxxxx code put on a string should only give you a list of
strings) and complex constraints (returning full complex objects) with no
difference between both queries.
Regards
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20140217/2947e9c5/attachment.html>
