The new GT.M is upward compatible - an option is added to allow existing
null subscripts and prohibit new ones. Nothing has been taken away, and
the previous options remain, to permit or prohibit (the default
behavior) null subscripts.
Nancy Anthracite wrote:
Are you using the new GTM? As I
A patch with a number ending in Tnn (where 'nn' is some number) is a
test patch.
===
Gregory Woodhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
And the end of all our exploring
will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time
-- T.S. Eliot
On Jul 10, 2005, at 10:50 PM, Anna Joseph wrote:
to
essentially be line art.
Jim Gray
- Original Message -
From: Nancy Anthracite [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 8:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site paramaters
option' !!!
I think
Thurman Pedigo wrote:
This story IS legend, reported over and over. My recollections it made
headlines when it occurred - not that long ago.
Not an urban legend but LEGENDARY (and one of the forces behind the
FDA's entry into the software as medical device arena)
Some of the most widely cited
:23 PM
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: RE: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define
Imaging site paramaters
option' !!!
I think the issue here is patient safety for
medical
DEVICES.
I was griping about this issue to a friend of mine
who
works in IT in a hospital
: Saturday, July 09, 2005 1:36 AM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site paramaters
option' !!!
OK, here is what is in the VA Demo:
OUTPUT FROM WHAT FILE: OPTION// INSTALL(5894 entries)
Select INSTALL NAME: MAG
1 MAG 2.5T11 Install Completed 10/16/[EMAIL
@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site paramaters
option' !!!
It's not quite so absurd, though, when you consider that MUMPS is
traditionally interpreted, and if you change the code on the system
where it is intended to run, then you are effectively
I can't argue with that. My point was that on a system where the
software really is being used for medical imaging, you don't want
people tinkering with the code.
Of course, that brings up another question: Why would anyone want to
use this code to handle things like scanned documents?
...the real issue IMHO is that the scanning functionality has been held
hostage by the FDA issue...if the sledge hammer works then why not use
it or make it into something more appropriatebut no one will do it
with the perceived threat of the FDA Police descending upon them.
Perhaps all
But if you just want to store scanned images, why don't you use
something like Apache? What's the point of the added overhead (and
expense) of using a system designed for medical imaging?
===
Gregory Woodhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add,
I think the point of using some of the imaging software is that when patches
are applied to VistA, it would seem less likely to step on any scanning
solution installed if the imaging routines used to retrieve documents from a
server and link them to a patient were used to retrieve these scanned
] Can't find 'Define Imaging site paramaters
option' !!!
...the real issue IMHO is that the scanning functionality has been held
hostage by the FDA issue...if the sledge hammer works then why not use
it or make it into something more appropriatebut no one will do it
with the perceived threat
Write a module.
===
Gregory Woodhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
A hero is no braver than an ordinary
man, but he is brave five minutes longer.
-- Ralph Waldo Emerson
On Jul 9, 2005, at 3:37 PM, Thurman Pedigo wrote:
t would be nice to have a convenient interface with FM/CPRS. Does
Apache do
that?
I would say that with what is going on right now, we need a workaround, soon.
So if the purist in you can be suppressed for a bit, perhaps you would like
to suggest one? ;-)
BTW Thurman, I too use Paperport, but I would love a nice seamless link to
VistA and CPRS. I have thought of barcoding
Exactly!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:hardhats-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nancy Anthracite
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 5:30 PM
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site paramaters
option
] [mailto:hardhats-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nancy Anthracite
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 5:30 PM
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site
paramaters
option' !!!
BTW Thurman, I too use Paperport, but I would love a nice seamless
!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:hardhats-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nancy Anthracite
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 5:30 PM
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site
paramaters
option' !!!
BTW
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:hardhats-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thurman Pedigo
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 7:23 PM
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: RE: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site paramaters
option' !!!
Don't think you are missing
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: RE: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site
paramaters option' !!!
Don't think you are missing anything. What we need is someway to link a
patient, ideally a visit, to a server that contains pdf files, so that
that
clicking
Actually, word processing (WP) is just Fileman jargon for plain old
text (of arbitrary length). There is a choice between word wrap and
no word wrap, and some rudimentary formatting capabilities, but very
little.
I think Nancy is right that if you do use OCR to produce a text file,
you'd
On Sat, 2005-07-09 at 22:53, Gregory Woodhouse wrote:
Actually, word processing (WP) is just Fileman jargon for plain old
text (of arbitrary length). There is a choice between word wrap and
no word wrap, and some rudimentary formatting capabilities, but very
little.
OK :)
Ruben
I
Woodhouse
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 8:53 PM
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site paramaters
option' !!!
Actually, word processing (WP) is just Fileman jargon for plain old
text (of arbitrary length). There is a choice
My assumption (perhaps wrong) was that depending on Imaging to do
this was causing problems for you. FWIW, if I were to try and design
an independent solution, I'd do something like this:
1. Create a new SCANNED DOCUMENT file.
2. I assume you want to associate documents with patients, and
@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site paramaters
option' !!!
My assumption (perhaps wrong) was that depending on Imaging to do
this was causing problems for you. FWIW, if I were to try and design
an independent solution, I'd do something like this:
1. Create
Then again, RTF is just text, too. I keep thinking I should learn
RTF, but haven't been terribly enthusiastic about it. :-|
BTW, I have used WP fields to store XML, and at least one major
Delphi application I've seen and used makes extensive use of XSLT.
So, if you were really ambitious
I think the issue here is patient safety for medical
DEVICES.
I was griping about this issue to a friend of mine who
works in IT in a hospital. He is familiar with the
FDA regulations. He told me a story that gave me some
perspective. Perhaps its an urban legand, but I don't
think so.
At
This is exactly what I have done.
Kevin
--- Gregory Woodhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you just use Apache as a web server, then
basically all you need
is a Delphi component capable of retrieving a
document via HTTP, and
I can't believe that such a thing doesn't already
exist
My method is to take the URL, wrap it in the bare
minimum to identify itself as a web page, and store it
as a standard document.
When CPRS retrieves the note, it scans the note and if
it finds an HTML header, then instead of displaying it
in a Memo field (the Delphi term), instead, it passes
it
, 2005 9:41 AM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site paramaters
option' !!!
Can you run ED^MAGUSIT ?
On Thursday 07 July 2005 11:26 pm, Anna Joseph wrote:
I've have re-indexed the OPTIONS file with no problem this time. But, I
still cannot find the 'define Imaging
08, 2005 9:41 AM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site paramaters
option' !!!
Can you run ED^MAGUSIT ?
On Thursday 07 July 2005 11:26 pm, Anna Joseph wrote:
I've have re-indexed the OPTIONS file with no problem this time. But, I
still cannot find the 'define
Anthracite [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 9:41 AM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site
paramaters option' !!!
Can you run ED^MAGUSIT ?
On Thursday 07 July 2005 11:26 pm, Anna Joseph wrote
I have that routine with the same two first lines in a test installation of the
VA Demo
OpenVista with no additional patches installed and the routine is included in
an older
OpenVistA but the second line indicates an older version;
;;2.5;IMAGING;**1**;June 29, 2001
Anna's error in typing the
OK, here is what is in the VA Demo:
OUTPUT FROM WHAT FILE: OPTION// INSTALL(5894 entries)
Select INSTALL NAME: MAG
1 MAG 2.5T11 Install Completed 10/16/[EMAIL PROTECTED]:41:41
= VistA Imaging v2.5t11L ;Created on Oct 16, [EMAIL PROTECTED]:51:14
2 MAG*3.0*1
on how you use it.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim Self
Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 12:02 PM
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site paramaters
option' !!!
I have
It's not quite so absurd, though, when you consider that MUMPS is
traditionally interpreted, and if you change the code on the system
where it is intended to run, then you are effectively modifying the
executable. It's not just a matter of making a copy of the source
code and saying Don't
This is to inquire as to wheather the Open VistA Semiviva 4.0, which we are
presently using, has the 'Define Imaging site paramaters option'.
As per the documentation i have gone thru (IMAGING SYSTEM INSTALLATION
GUIDE ), the MAG SYS MENU is supposed to have'Define Imaging site
paramaters
I looked in the option file in the VA Demo and both of those options are
listed.
GTMD Q^DI
VA FileMan 22.0
Select OPTION: 5 INQUIRE TO FILE ENTRIES
OUTPUT FROM WHAT FILE: RPC BROKER SITE PARAMETERS// OPTION
1 OPTION (10126 entries)
2 OPTION
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nancy Anthracite
Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 7:27 AM
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site paramaters
option' !!!
I looked in the option file in the VA Demo and both of those options are
listed
It might not be there, but it's also possible that there is a problem
with the B cross-reference.
===
Gregory Woodhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Education is a progressive discovery
of our own ignorance.
--Will Durant
On Jul 7, 2005, at 9:25 AM, Thurman Pedigo wrote:
Interesting:
Select OPTION:
Come to think of it, it might not be just that one cross-reference,
given that the case may also be an issue (mixed case and all caps are
indexed separately). In any case, why don't you re-index the file and
try again. (File 19 is not like file 2, it's not one of the files
that can't
, 2005 12:31 PM
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site paramaters
option' !!!
It might not be there, but it's also possible that there is a problem
with the B cross-reference.
===
Gregory Woodhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED
Is the parameter defined in your kernel parameters file? You may very
well be missing a patch, and since it's Imaging, and Imaging isn't
part of the standard FOIA release (and it depends on a commercial
product to work), the parameter and its supporting options may very
well not be
@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site paramaters
option' !!!
Is the parameter defined in your kernel parameters file? You may very
well be missing a patch, and since it's Imaging, and Imaging isn't
part of the standard FOIA release (and it depends on a commercial
If that's the case, you could try a SEARCH of file 19 to see if the
missing option is really missing. Do you know the actual name (.01
field) of the option? Also, you should check to see if the parameter
is defined.
===
Gregory Woodhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The most incomprehensible thing
: Friday, July 08, 2005 3:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site paramaters
option' !!!
If that's the case, you could try a SEARCH of file 19 to see if the
missing option is really missing. Do you know the actual name (.01
field) of the option? Also, you should
]
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 8:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site paramaters
option' !!!
That's what I get to see in the options file. Even the number of options I
have are less (as compared to Nancy's 10126 entries). Guess
@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 3:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site paramaters
option' !!!
If that's the case, you could try a SEARCH of file 19 to see if the
missing option is really missing. Do you know the actual name (.01
field
option???
Anna
- Original Message -
From: Anna Joseph [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 8:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Can't find 'Define Imaging site paramaters
option' !!!
That's what I get to see in the options file
48 matches
Mail list logo
