I agree Bert, OpenEHR is not a standards developing organization. It creates specifications. These are found to be useful by some. But are sometimes in conflict with standards....
Vriendelijke groet, Dr. William Goossen Directeur Results 4 Care BV +31654614458 > Op 27 okt. 2014 om 17:00 heeft openehr-technical-request at lists.openehr.org > het volgende geschreven: > > Send openEHR-technical mailing list submissions to > openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > openehr-technical-request at lists.openehr.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > openehr-technical-owner at lists.openehr.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of openEHR-technical digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: MedInfo 2015 openEHR tutorials (Bert Verhees) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 22:09:54 +0100 > From: Bert Verhees <bert.verhees at rosa.nl> > To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org > Subject: Re: MedInfo 2015 openEHR tutorials > Message-ID: <544D6322.9000607 at rosa.nl> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed" > >> On 25-10-14 13:58, Thomas Beale wrote: >>> On 24/10/2014 19:17, Bert Verhees wrote: >>> OpenEHR is not a standard, it is a formal specification. >>> >>> http://www.iso.org/iso/home/standards.htm >>> ISO, What is a standard: >>> >>> "A standard is a document that provides requirements, specifications, >>> guidelines or characteristics that can be used consistently to ensure >>> that materials, products, processes and services are fit for their >>> purpose." >> >> This is such a fun topic I wrote a blog post >> <http://wolandscat.net/2014/10/25/what-is-a-standard-legislation-or-utilisation/> >> >> on it :) >> >> - thomas >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> openEHR-technical mailing list >> openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org >> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org > I replied following to it: > > Thomas, you write: ?They still publish documents, not computable > artefacts, standards have no maintenance team, no issue reporting > capability and no update release strategy.? > > This not true, at least not at ECMA and ISO. > > 1) Example in the standard for Microsoft OOXML are XML Schema?s (XSD) > included. So they deliver computable artefacts. > > 2) They do not only publish standards, but organize international > teamsmeetings of people which create/edit the standards. A standard in a > specific version is stable, it cannot change, it would be unusable if it > was not stable. > > 3) Maintenance, ISO standards can get updated, there are even fasttracks > , so not the complete standard has to be talked through. An update, of > course, gets a distinguishable version/name/id. > > What you write about OpenEHR doing much better as a defacto standard is > not fully correct. > > Example: I am missing some computable artefacts. For example, we have > waited five years before the RM-XSD was published in a correct way, and > still there are some inconveniences in it. There were errors in that > XSD, I emailed about it years ago. Now it has been revised, but not > fully, there are still errors I reported in 2009. > It is also not optimal. For example by using xs:sequence instead of > xs:choice, and so enforcing a useless sequence of properties. There are > some more issues, I do not want to discuss them now. > > Also, the XSD for OET is still not published, and it is used in software > and by developers. How long are we using templates by now? 10 years? > > OpenEHR seems to be in some parts a moving target. A quality-institute > as ISO would not allow this. There are some quality-requirements used by > ISO. The standard is not only created by the designers (stakeholders), > but by worldwide teams and it becomes accepted by vote of the voting > members of ISO. > > I would welcome if OpenEHR would become a standard, not only because > many governments do not invest in non-standards, but also for the > quality requirements standardization-bodies pose and for having > worldwide non-stakeholding teams looking at it. I think this is important. > > Bert > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20141026/d43045e1/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org > > ------------------------------ > > End of openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 32, Issue 62 > *************************************************
