I can't see any problem to the approach you propose. 2015-08-28 15:05 GMT+02:00 Bakke, Silje Ljosland < silje.ljosland.ba...@nasjonalikt.no>:
> Hi everyone, > > > > We’ve bumped into an issue related to versioning of archetypes and > implementing non-published versions: > > > > Several implementation projects are using archetypes from the > http://arketyper.no CKM, many of which are still drafts or under review > since the CKM switch to v0 for unpublished archetypes was done only > recently, and the publicly available tools all use v1 by default, lots of > functionality has already been made using unpublished v1 versions of > archetypes, and will be deployed this autumn. Of course, when reviewed, > these archetypes may go through drastic changes, and this will be a problem > once other projects at a later time try to use archetypes which by then may > have been published as v1. > > > > One of our proposed solutions is to skip v1 for these archetypes and go > straight to v2 when publishing them. Is this practically possible, and will > it have any adverse consequences? > > > > Kind regards, > *Silje Ljosland Bakke* > > > > Information Architect, RN > > Coordinator, National Editorial Board for Archetypes > National ICT Norway > > Tel. +47 40203298 > > Web: http://arketyper.no / Twitter: @arketyper_no > <https://twitter.com/arketyper_no> > > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org > -- David Moner Cano Grupo de Informática Biomédica - IBIME Instituto ITACA http://www.ibime.upv.es http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmoner Universidad Politécnica de Valencia (UPV) Camino de Vera, s/n, Edificio G-8, Acceso B, 3ª planta Valencia – 46022 (España)
_______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
