On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, Tim Churches wrote: ... > Many lessons can be learnt from the OMG/Corbamed and HL7 experience: > that a closed "reference group" which you have to pay to join is not > the right way to go.
Tim, My guess is that the "closed reference group" approach failed because it takes too much work to introduce change into the ontology/vocabulary. It is not just "paying to join" - but paying (monetary + non-monetary cost) every time you need to change anything or add anything into the standard. > But a complete free-for-all won't work either. Maybe a partial "free-for-all" then? :-) You are free to create any archetypes/OIO forms as long as you are creating archetypes/ OIO forms. > And there need to be many levels of commonality - at the global, > national, regional and local levels. ... We don't have to design the social-contract network as part of the information system project. We just have to be able to support it. We have several studies that use the same OIO forms. It seems to work and looks easily scalable to other "levels" of forms-sharing arrangements. Best regards, Andrew --- Andrew P. Ho, M.D. OIO: Open Infrastructure for Outcomes www.TxOutcome.Org (Hosting OIO Library #1 and OSHCA Mirror #1)
