On 12/09/2016 07:25, Bert Verhees wrote:
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.
indeed there is. But what I am talking about here is not whether Snomed
value sets can be versioned but the non-technical question of whether
specific, well-known value sets can be established globally, regardless
of specific terminology servers etc and whether they can then be relied
on globally to exist in the same way a specific concept code is assumed
to exist. Specific value sets (generally large ones) have been defined
on Snomed CT, what I am thinking about is a fast, efficient mechanism
for creating curating and publishing any value set, of which thousands
will be needed, or whether each health organisation will end up
replicating this work and creating similar / same private value sets
with different identifiers.
It may be that this is an argument for sharing value set definitions
(i.e. the constraint expressions) within AQL queries and archetypes as
being a way to do this.
- thomas
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
