On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 05:02, Joseph Dal Molin wrote: > ~ natural selection can often be uncomfortable and in some cases > extremely painful (when you don't survive)... but for it to be more > intelligent you need open critical peer review
Ok......the openEHR documents are available for review. But hen 'natural' selection sometimes picks VHS instead of Beta. ;-) > ~ pooling resources often means pooling politics...which increases both > the risk of failure and drift from the original objectives That's a definite maybe. > ~ "government and institutional".... Tim you have been in Canada too > long ... :-).... there a tons of sources if you take a problem focused > approach rather than a technical one This was confusing. I have no idea what me visiting Canada (and the length of that visit) has to do with the fact that some of these projects need to be funded by the organizations that stand to benefit. Maybe my statement wasn't clear but I intended it to refer to funding on the scale of things like openEHR and DrugRef development by governments and institutions that stand to benefit from a positive outcome. The other rant was a parallel of this, to the people that benefit or stand to benefit from other projects, be they healthcare specific or not. But that does include DrugRef too since it will require many people to donate a small amount of time to "peer review" the content. Later, Tim
