Agree with Pablo's description. The Better Archetype Designer (AD) uses a new json format that takes the place of the .oet and is closely aligned to ADL2. AD also imports and exports .oet formats and exports .opt.
.opt is the critical 'technical' junction point from which most other technical artefacts are derived - flattened data formats, server/ client side validation, HTML visualisation, form rendering blah blah! Once I have generated an .opt that is me handing the clinical models over to the tech guys. Ian Dr Ian McNicoll mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 office +44 (0)1536 414994 skype: ianmcnicoll email: [email protected] twitter: @ianmcnicoll Director, freshEHR Clinical Informatics Ltd. CCIO inidus Ltd. [email protected] Co-Chair, openEHR Foundation [email protected] Hon. Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL On Fri, 6 Sep 2019 at 15:11, Pablo Pazos <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, OET is the source format for templates on Ocean tools, that is the one > that can be edited. Other tools might have a different source format or > support the OET. > > The OPT is the final form, exported from different tools, like a big > archetype for full documents. Depending on the tool, those can or can't be > edited directly without the source format. > > Best, > Pablo. > > On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 9:15 AM Georg Fette <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> I am not yet very familiar with templates and I only recently started >> digging into the documentation. >> One thing I encountered is the distiguishment between template (.oet) >> and operational templates (.opt). >> I played a bit using the oceans-toolbox and transformed some .oets into >> .opts. >> Although the oceans-toolbox seems not capable to reimport the exported >> .opts, it looks like both representations can be transformed into the >> other without loss of information. E.g. in the .opt some parts of the >> archetypes can be set to 0..0, but they still exist if needed to >> recreate the constrain that was used to model this 0..0 (which perhaps >> formerly was a 0..1). >> So my questions are: >> - Are the two representation really bidirectionally transformable into >> each other ? >> - For which tasks is which representations mostly used for ? Is it >> correct to say that the former is more appropriate for modeling purposes >> and the latter more for technical processing. >> Greetings >> Georg >> >> -- >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Dipl.-Inf. Georg Fette Raum: B001 >> Universität Würzburg Tel.: +49-(0)931-31-85516 >> Am Hubland Fax.: +49-(0)931-31-86732 >> 97074 Würzburg mail: [email protected] >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> openEHR-technical mailing list >> [email protected] >> >> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org >> > > > -- > *Ing. Pablo Pazos Gutiérrez* > [email protected] > +598 99 043 145 > skype: cabolabs > Subscribe to our newsletter <http://eepurl.com/b_w_tj> > <https://cabolabs.com/> > http://www.cabolabs.com > https://cloudehrserver.com > > _______________________________________________ > 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
