"It is still in ADL2, but harmless, so I would leave it in the specs and advise tool developers to ignore it, if that is the consensus."
That would be my preference. Perhaps add a note to the specs explaining why it is being deprecated (if others agree). Ian Dr Ian McNicoll mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 office +44 (0)1536 414994 skype: ianmcnicoll email: i...@freshehr.com twitter: @ianmcnicoll Co-Chair, openEHR Foundation ian.mcnic...@openehr.org Director, freshEHR Clinical Informatics Ltd. Director, HANDIHealth CIC Hon. Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 14:47, Thomas Beale <thomas.be...@openehr.org> wrote: > It is still in ADL2, but harmless, so I would leave it in the specs and > advise tool developers to ignore it, if that is the consensus. > > - t > > On 09/10/2018 06:29, Sebastian Garde wrote: > > Assumed value was a slick idea at the time, but I do agree with your > sentiments now: > > - it is hardly or not at all processable, > - where there is widespread consensus on something it may well be > assumed automatically by clinicians – but this is not because someone put > the assumed value in the archetype or not. > - Elements where such consensus exists across professions/sectors are > probably rare anyway and universal consensus on an assumption is hard to > ascertain > - challenges for UI > - challenges for querying (assuming you even dare) > - challenges for anybody to understand it, including the difference to > a default value (and what happens if there is both). > > > > Not sure about the implications for dropping/deprecating this at this stage > > > > Sebastian > > > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > 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
