On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 11:47, Thomas Beale wrote:I don't think so - I'm just saying that there are 70 or so standardised HL7 messages in Australia. The details are easy enough to get hold of.
same HL7 software, and to a lesser extent in Australia, where HL7v2
messages are standardised for he whole country.
Thomas,
now you have entered the realm of fantasy.
WHERE please are HL7v2 messages standardised for the whole country in any single real world example (i.e. actually used software) ? Please, WHERE?I didn't say they were in Australia; they are to some extent in NZ, to my knowledge.
I know of not a single example, and I should know. Neither as a privately practising family doctor (G.P.) nor as a hospital doctor (VMO) I get a single message in HL7, not even the two largest pathology or radiology providers in our area use them.I didn't say anything about anyone usng them ni Australia; they are used in some places, but the previous PIT message 'standard' still prevails in a lot of areas.
One of the minor path providers can send me pathology results as HL7 messages, but both software packages I use can't understand that particular HL7 dialect.exactly - this is the problem of N^2 translation that HL7v2 has. I was just saying that Andrew's statement that "HL7 has failed" is not totally correct; and regardless of the shortcomings (of which I can be as critical as anyone else), there are quite a lot of implementations, and there is a measure of success. It's been a step on the path, and a lot of things were learned.
- thomas
