Op 11-9-2016 om 20:21 schreef Thomas Beale:
Not an unreasonable point of view, but it sort of implies that there
are / will be no well-known / reliable terminology value sets out
there - only specific value sets inside specific terminology services.
This problem hads been tackled by IHTSDO. They never allow a concept to
disappear, and all members should install the latest updates. There is a
lot of thought inside SCT about versioning.
On 11/09/2016 19:10, Diego Boscá wrote:
The problem I see with depending on a given terminology service is
that the code you are defining may or may not be known by the
terminology service. This could be ok for templates, but not for
archetypes. In my opinion generic archetypes should be based on known
syntaxes rather than in specific queries to terminology services
whenever is possible
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
