On 04-12-16 19:18, Diego Boscá wrote:
constraints in specialized archetypes must be included in the parent constraints. e.g. parent archetype contains the "any allergy" subset and the children archetype contains "all allergies caused by a drug", and for that specialization to be correct, the second should be a subset of the first one.
That is what I mean with the parallel semantic world. In your archetypes, you create in this way a semantic world that has no trust-able semantic connection to the SNOMED semantic world. Maybe there is compatibility, but we can never be sure about it.
In fact, working this way is creating many semantic worlds (for every institution which creates archetypes sets), a situation which we are for twenty years very busy with, to avoid.
If we want to be sure that we are talking about the same thing, we need a common reference, and SNOMED is a good example for how a common reference can look like. I would not know a better one.
Why SNOMED is so suitable to be a good reference, is because SNOMED defines into many details, which are common ground for the member states.
We can be sure what SNOMED means when it talks about "allergy for drug", because we agree to the very extensive semantic world of which this statement is a part.
Bert _______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
