I remember having the same kind of problem and thoughts about this....enter
the mix of code, value, quantity, types etc etc.
>From what i can recollect (has been a while), you should/could ask yourself
first:
is a 'value' at all 'quantifiable'? (oh oh terminology strikes again :) )
for example: a code (could be an integer, but a string would do fine too)
or a link to a certain dosage of a drug, in which that dosage contains
information like "twice a day", might not be a numeric value or whatsoever.
It is however, quantifiable.
(I realise one could say, just the child in an object-inherited relationship
is quantifiable
- then again, if you want to perform calculations ...)
Just some (rusty?) cents.
Bart
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OpenCare.Net
Solutions and projectmanagement for Healthcare ICT
Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Another modelling question, as part of our development of the openEHR
> "convergence model" for EHRs:
>
> In GEHR there is a DATA_VALUE subtype called QUANTITY, which models
> physical quantities. See bottom for abstract semantics.
>
> HL7 has a type called QTY also, with similar semantics.
>
> The question is: do we really need two types, to model discrete and
> continuous quantities? For example, DISCRETE_QUANTITY and
> CONTINUOUS_QUANTITY. Currently, the type of value in QUANTITY is REAL,
> which theoretically accommodates INTEGER, i.e.
> the possible values of discrete measurements, but it hides the true
> nature of discrete v continuous thing being measured; in particular, we
> have to add semantics to the class to allow it to be specified as
> discrete or continuous.
>
