Bert
there is no resistance, in fact I at least agree with your general idea
- see my other post. Just a question of getting the analysis right,
implementing it and releasing a specification update. Then retroatively
fitting it to ADL 1.4 (now we need ADL 1.5 ;)
- thomas
On 16/05/2017 13:24, Bert Verhees wrote:
On 16-05-17 18:14, Thomas Beale wrote:
sure. But there are a lot that do, just not the ones you know ;) We
have to make things work for everyone.
So what about my suggestion a few weeks ago, to add a comment-section
to a terminology-binding url to explain what the url does.
Most people will never be able to understand LOINC codes or
SNOMED-post coordinated expressions or constraints.
So an explanation-section can do good work in that case. Good tooling
can keep it up to date.
The point is that SNOMED constraints and expressions offer a wealth of
possibilities to express clinical ideas in a language independent
interoperable way.
I have difficulties to understand the resistance against this.
It can take OpenEHR, in my view, to a higher level, without changing
much on the standard.
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
