I'll incorporate the suggestions into the statement after (hopefully) I get more views coming in..... I'll appreciate if you can help refine the other mission statements. There are some that can be combined and some need to be further qualified?
I am also looking forward to comments from those who had volunteered (during the Nov discussions) to be in the pro-tem committee so that we are all in sync at this stage. (remembering the times of old OSHCA ;-) ) These Vision, Mission, Principles and core activities will form the Foundation for OSHCA and we would like the community to agree to them. Rgds, Molly Jeff wrote: >On 1/18/06, Mark Spohr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>Thank you, Molly for putting this together. >> >> > >I'd like to second that. I don't usually get a chance to post to this >list, but I have been watching it for a while. > > > >>I think we should also add support for open data standards. Proprietary data >>standards are a barrier to FOSS and to information sharing. Massachusetts >>has recently mandated open document standards for state documents and this >>will boost FOSS. >> >>I think we should modify: >> 3. Make recommendations on Guidelines on Health Information Standards to >> support open data standards. (Open standards are published and can be used >> without restriction.) >> >> > >I can't agree with this enough. There are plenty of wonderful >opensource standards which are available to the community without >barrier of entrance fee or gated "community", and if we all work >together, these can become the industry de-facto standards. > >The real barrier is proprietary systems, many of which are legacy >systems which will not be upgraded in the near future, running >versions of these proprietary standards. Things like this are the >reason why we will continue to have to support things like X12 for >interchange, merely because these legacy systems will never provide >support for other things. Perhaps through the use of bridging software >and middleware, we'll be able to push the use and acceptance of >opensource standards, not just because they are "free", but because >they're just better. > >-- >Thanks, >Jeff >([EMAIL PROTECTED]) >FreeMED Software Foundation, Inc >http://freemedsoftware.com/ >http://freemedsoftware.org/ > > > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/openhealth/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
