Andrew Ho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 3 Jul 2003, Tim Churches wrote: > > Andrew Ho wrote: > > And OIO does (I think) have a data model, in fact many, > user-definable > > data models, > > You are correct. OIO has a data model but the data model does not > include > medical / domain-specific / application-specific terminology. OIO is > similar to OpenEHR/GEHR design in this regard. The "terminology" > layer is > built through forms (= OpenEHR archetypes). > > So technically, OIO and OpenEHR per se are not EMR system. OIO can be > used > as an "infrastructure" to build EMR's but OIO is not an EMR!
No argument there. > > > which results in an underlying physical data model like this (using > an > > E-R style diagram, where --> means has zero or more): > > > > Patient > > -->FormA > > -->FormB > > -->FormC > > -->etc > > > > Or if you prefer a more O-O view: > > > > PatientInstances > > -->FormInstances > > -->Value-AttributeInstances > > Right. > > > The latter view doesn't show that there are various Value-Attribute > > subclasses available, but UML diagrams in ASCII are a bit > challenging to > > compose. Of course, I have only superficial knowledge of OIO, so I > might > > be completely wrong. > > You are completely right. O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. Tim C (with thanks to Lewis Carroll) > There is an additional Attribute-type level > but > it is a small detail. > > Best regards, > > Andrew
