There is a very clear use-case for having it there - O2 levels variably and equivalently described a FiO2 which is a unitary proportion or percent.
I think we need to keep it for that reason if no other. 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 Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 12:07, Thomas Beale <thomas.be...@openehr.org> wrote: > Hi Silje, > > See here > <https://specifications.openehr.org/releases/RM/latest/data_types.html#_ratios_and_proportions>. > But I think the % case may have been there since early 2000s and either % > was not in UCUM, or perhaps it was, but we did not realise it. So ideally > we should change the documentation to obsolete it in DV_PROPORTION. > > - thomas > On 04/01/2019 20:40, Bakke, Silje Ljosland wrote: > > In that case, I don't understand the use case for the 'percent' and 'unitary' > variants of the DV_PROPORTION data type. What are they for? > > Regards, > Silje > > -----Original Message----- > From: openEHR-technical <openehr-technical-boun...@lists.openehr.org> > <openehr-technical-boun...@lists.openehr.org> On Behalf Of Thomas Beale > Sent: Friday, January 4, 2019 8:38 PM > To: firstname.lastname@example.org > Subject: Re: DV_PROPORTION vs DV_QUANTITY for % > > > On 03/01/2019 08:37, David Moner wrote: > > I think DV_QUANTITY is the option here. Someone could argue that % is > not a proper unit, but it is, both in UCUM and SNOMED CT. > > DV_PROPORTION should be only used when you want to maintain the > numerator and denominator explicitly separated, as a fraction, which > should not be the case with percentages. But it is true that the > definition of the type attribute in the specification is a bit > misleading: "Indicates semantic type of proportion, including percent, > unitary etc." > > David is right on all counts - use DV_QUANTITY, but we should fix that line > in the specification. Can someone raise a PR on that please. > > - thomas > > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing > listopenEHRemail@example.com://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing > listopenEHRfirstname.lastname@example.org://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org > > -- > Thomas Beale > Principal, Ars Semantica <http://www.arssemantica.com> > Consultant, ABD Project, 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/> | The Objective Stance > <https://theobjectivestance.net/> > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHRemail@example.com > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org >
_______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHRfirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org