On 16/02/2018 11:46, Pablo Pazos wrote:
Hi Pieter,
Besides the API, I think for ADL2 archetypes and templates/OPTs have
the same model,
ADL2 archetypes and templates have the same model as each other, but not
the same as ADL14 archetypes or templates...
and archetype IDs / template IDs will follow the same structure.So for
ADL2 using archetypes or templates would be the same in the API.
they are nearly the same; the ADL2 ids can have namespaces and also
3-part version ids.
Which endpoints do you find problematic in terms of using ADL2?
About querying, analyzing your use case, I think there are two ways of
knowing the full specialization hierarchy, one is to query an
archetype repo/CKM while evaluating a query and do not have that info
in the data repo. Like "give me all archetype IDs that specialize arch
ID X", this will be [A, B, C], then use that list on the query in your
data repo like "archetype_id IN [A, B, C]".
The other option is to have the archetype repo/CKM integrated with the
clinical data repo (which I don't like architecturally speaking), so
the "give me all the archetype IDs that specialize arch ID X" is
resolved internally.
agree - CKM and other source management repos should be kept separate.
Operational artefact repos should only include valid artefacts that are
part of some release that is intended to be used with the system,
including for query computations.
--
Thomas Beale
Principal, Ars Semantica <http://www.arssemantica.com>
Consultant, ABD Team, Intermountain Healthcare
<https://intermountainhealthcare.org/>
Management Board, Specifications Program Lead, openEHR Foundation
<http://www.openehr.org>
Chartered IT Professional Fellow, BCS, British Computer Society
<http://www.bcs.org/category/6044>
Health IT blog <http://wolandscat.net/> | Culture blog
<http://wolandsothercat.net/>
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
