Maybe in the case of terminologies it could be put in a kind of "terminology metadata" part that we discussed some time ago to correctly identify the different terminology versions.
2014-11-13 11:33 GMT+01:00 Thomas Beale <thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com>: > On 13/11/2014 10:02, Heather Leslie wrote: >> >> I've had discussions with IHTSDO about needing a formal statement about >> SCT that should be placed in archetypes and this will be identical to that >> which they are currently working on with CIMI. >> >> Regards >> >> Heather > > > The main thing we need to do with this in my view is put most of such > statements online in each user org (CIMI, Intermountain, openEHR etc) and > make the text that is in the archetype itself as short as legally possible. > > Consider that putting the whole (identical) statement for each acknowledged > type of IP in the current CIMI archetypes - 2200 of them - would a) dwarf > the main content in most of those archetypes and b) create a source of > unnecessary updates to archetypes. Consider a licence notice for SNOMED CT > for example. If it mentions 'IHTSDO', it will most likely be out of date in > a year's time if IHTSDO changes its name next year, as was talked about at > the recent meeting in Amsterdam, and that's 2200 archetypes that have to be > put through a revision and reissue process, unnecessarily. > > - thomas > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
