On 26/07/2016 07:58, Ivar Yrke wrote:
Hi
Last thing first: We also have the need for «proposed». For that we
use PLANNED. After all you can CANCEL from PLANNED, so it serves the
purpose. I think the issue here is to not overinterpret the names in
the state machine and to avoid making it overly complex.
I agree with your initial concern that the use of INITIAL state is not
very clear. In the diagram it is grayed out, indicating that there is
something special about it. I have come to think that it is the
initial pseudo state, the one that in UML is a black filled circle. As
such this state can never exist, meaning that there always must be an
ACTION attached giving it a real state (there is no other way to
assign a state).
this is the correct interpretation of the state machine.
With this background I therefore agree with the replies from Heath.
If your PR will lead to clarifications in the description or even in
the state machine, I would like the following to be considered along
the way:
·Clarify if INITIAL is a real or pseudo state. Should there always be
an ACTION giving each ACTIVITY a real state?
yes it is a pseudo-state; please mention this in the PR if anyone things
the documentation is not clear enough about it.
Also, ACTIONs have to occur to move the state machine forward, otherwise
it is nothing every started.
·The Instruction State Machine (ISM) is actually an Activity State
Machine (ASM). This is very confusing when introducing to new persons
and I wonder if it would be beneficial with a name change here. The
instruction aggregated state is really the state of the instruction.
that's an interesting point! We called it the Instruction State Machine
because it's the state machine of the instruction - i.e. intervention,
medication etc - in the real world, 'being done'. We can only know where
the progress is up to by a series of ACTIONs representing actions that
were done in the real world. So from that point of view, it seems
reasonable to call it the Instruction State Machine, even though it is
by means of ACTIONs being reported that we know what state it is
currently in. I suspect we can at least clarify the documentation text
on this, so please mention it in the PR as well.
·There seems to be a missing transition “do” that goes directly from
INITIAL to COMPLETED. This is needed both for ad hoc ACTIONS as well
as one time ACTIVITIES that have already been done by the time of
doing the “paper work”. It seems overly formal to have to model this
through two ACTIONS.
good point - that would be an easy addition to make.
- thomas
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
