Thanks! If I knew the syntax I could hack the ADL and test how TD handles it. ☺
Regards, Silje From: openEHR-technical [mailto:openehr-technical-boun...@lists.openehr.org] On Behalf Of Ian McNicoll Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 12:17 PM To: For openEHR technical discussions <openehr-technical@lists.openehr.org> Subject: Re: Runtime name suggestions? Hi Silje As Thomas has noted, it is possible in adl but is not supported in archetype editor. That is probably fixable but I'm not sure currently how template designer would handle it. Ian On Tue, 17 Jan 2017 at 11:03, Bakke, Silje Ljosland <silje.ljosland.ba...@nasjonalikt.no<mailto:silje.ljosland.ba...@nasjonalikt.no>> wrote: Thank you Thomas, to the extent I understand the ADL, this looks like what we’re looking for. How would the corresponding syntax look in ADL 1.4? Regards, Silje From: openEHR-technical [mailto:openehr-technical-boun...@lists.openehr.org<mailto:openehr-technical-boun...@lists.openehr.org>] On Behalf Of Thomas Beale Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 11:50 AM To: openehr-technical@lists.openehr.org<mailto:openehr-technical@lists.openehr.org> Subject: Re: Runtime name suggestions? Hi Silje, I'm not sure enough of the requirement, but this ADL logic<http://www.openehr.org/releases/AM/latest/docs/ADL2/ADL2.html#_reference_model_type_refinement> may be what you are looking for. See the DV_TEXT/DV_CODED_TEXT just before the following heading after that section. The basic logic of this is described here<http://www.openehr.org/releases/AM/latest/docs/ADL2/ADL2.html#_narrowed_subtype_constraints>. Although these are references from ADL2, they should apply in ADL 1.4 as well. - thomas On 17/01/2017 07:49, Bakke, Silje Ljosland wrote: Hi, We’re trying to finalise the pattern for exclusion archetypes, and would like to use the element names to carry some flavor differences such as “no known history of …” and “no evidence of …”. We’ve considered adding a runtime name constraint to make some level of standardization of these statements, but at the same time we recognize that there will be considerable variation in what will be required as statements in different use cases. So what we’d like to do is to use a kind of “optional runtime name constraint”, or “runtime name suggestion”. We know this isn’t supported by tooling atm, but is it allowed by the specs? If so, how can it be done? Kind regards, Silje Ljosland Bakke _______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org<mailto:openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
_______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
