On Monday 10 February 2003 09:35, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Archetypes are great to define very concise medical concepts <snip> > I could think of data exchange between > specialists and GPs, but GPs would probably have no archetypes > for endoscopic examination and their "ulcer" archetype would > be very different. How to handle this? You could send over the > archetypes as well, but what to do then? Storing the > specialist archetypes would not make sense since the GP > doesn't need them for his day-to-day work and if he did store > them, how would the specialist "ulcer" archetype interfere > with his own archetype?
I would expect that the model would be sub-classing and inheritance, in other words both the GP and the specialist archetype derive from a higher level, simpler, archetype about ulcers. Thus they should be expected to both fit into the object container being used without interfering with each other. > How do you refer to information that is > constructed with another archetype? There may be something worth lloking at in Arden Syntax for deciding how to do that sort of thing, and it may be unusual to need to do that automatically. -- From one of the Linux desktops of Dr Adrian Midgley http://www.defoam.net/
