Hi Pablo,
you should use the specs on the main spec home page
<http://www.openehr.org/programs/specification/workingbaseline>; in this
case I guess it is the AOM 1.4 spec
<http://www.openehr.org/releases/AM/latest/docs/AOM1.4/AOM1.4.html#_primitive_package>
you want to refer to.
We now have the basic time types in the Foundation types spec
<http://www.openehr.org/releases/BASE/latest/docs/foundation_types/foundation_types.html#_time_types>.
Both Duration and Iso8601_Duration are defined. For the archetype spec,
the former is assumed, because ISO8601 syntax representation is used in
archetypes.
The specification is much better (but different) in AOM2
<http://www.openehr.org/releases/AM/latest/docs/AOM2/AOM2.html#_c_duration_class>.
- thomas
On 19/03/2018 05:24, Pablo Pazos wrote:
Hi,
Looking at CDuration
http://www.openehr.org/releases/1.0.2/architecture/am/aom.pdf page 46,
the range constraint is defined with a Duration class.
On the support specs
http://www.openehr.org/releases/1.0.2/architecture/rm/support_im.pdf
page 30 we have the ISO8601_DURATION class.
Should AOM reference that class or we have another Duration class
somewhere?
Or should we use DV_DURATION in CDuration? (DV_DURATION inherits from
ISO8601_DURATION).
http://www.openehr.org/releases/1.0.2/architecture/rm/data_types_im.pdf
page 54
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
