While I agree with the SPEC-95 rationale (once you have a unit, you should be able to know what its property is), it is still convenient to have the property for constraining. Otherwise you don't have a way to say in an archetype: I don't care about the exact unit here, but please let it be a "Mass".
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: openEHR-technical [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Thomas Beale Gesendet: Freitag, 26. Januar 2018 09:13 An: [email protected] Betreff: Re: Quantities of arbitrary units in openEHR Right - at the moment, it is a 'fake' field in archetypes, enabled by being in the BMM or other expression of the RM. It's convenient to do this occasionally, since we don't think 'property' needs to be a field of DV_QUANTITY - but maybe it should be, since for some of the more esoteric units, it's not that clear what is being measured. This trick is also not mentioned in the ADL/AOM specs, and it either should be, or we just don't allow it. I don't have a strong opinion either way. - thomas On 26/01/2018 07:51, Pieter Bos wrote: > A bit unrelated perhaps, but in the 1.0.3 and 1.0.4 RM specification, > there is no property attribute or function present in dv_quantity, > even though the text says it can be conveniently constrained. There is > a reference to the spec-95 jira issue, which says it has been removed. > So there’s no way to constrain it - unless the specification contains > a mistake :) > > It is present in the BMM variants of the RM though, as a mandatory field. > > Regards, > > Pieter Bos > _______________________________________________ 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
