On Sun, 28 Dec 2003, Thomas Beale wrote: ... > 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;
Thomas, Rather than arguing whether or not "HL7 failed" completely or partially, I think it is much more useful to discuss what lessons were learned. The fact that we may have learned different lessons has serious implications regarding our plans for OpenEHR and OIO. If I understand you correctly, you learned that reducing the reliance on translators is the key to success - and you hope to achieve that through a robust archetype authoring and standardization infrastructure. For me, I learned that developing a robust infrastructure for the production and re-use of translators is essential - since re-use of OIO forms is already a "no-brainer". > 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. Is the new HL7 going to offer a translation infrastructure? Best regards, Andrew --- Andrew P. Ho, M.D. OIO: Open Infrastructure for Outcomes www.TxOutcome.Org
