proposed ADL 1.5 simplification
Peter, A change in the concept will cause a new canonical hash, because the concept is part of the ontology, and the ontology is part of the canonical hash. About changing ?archetype (adl_version=1.4)? to ?archetype (adl_version=1.5)?, you are right, this will cause also a new canonical hash. Although at this time the Archetype editor does not seem to take this ?archetype (adl_version=1.x)? in consideration when loading the Archetype in its environment, which is clearly a bug. (for instance, archetype (adl_version = 1.6) is also allowed and loaded by the current Archetype editor without giving any notification). A future Archetype Editor should not automatically upgrade an Archetype to a new ADL version and certainly not overwrite an existing Archetype of a previous ADL version. That will cause some major impact. About removing the concept, I do see a few (minor) advantages and disadvantages: Advantage: The simpler it gets, the better it is. Removing the ?concept? makes it more simpler. Disadvantage: All parsers should be reviewed and probably need to be updated. Overall we think it is a good proposal to remove the ?concept? out of the Archetype. Alessandro Torrisi On 6 July 2010 08:22, Sebastian Garde wrote: > > > Peter Gummer wrote: > > Sebastian Garde wrote: > > > > > >> Not sure if this change would has an impact on the canonical MD5 > >> hash generated by the Archetype Editor - ideally it would be the > >> same for an archetype with or without the concept clause? > >> > > > > > > I doubt it, Sebastian. Any small changes made to an archetype today > > will cause the MD5 hash to change. > > > > For example, open an existing archetype in a text editor and replace > > its first line: > > archetype (adl_version=1.4) > > With this: > > archetype (adl_version=1.5 > Ah, that's rightso each and every archetype MD5 hash will change > anyway when migrating to ADL 1.5 (with or without Tom's proposed change > to remove the concept) - then removing the concept shouldn't matter. > > Sebastian > > ___ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > -- Alessandro Torrisi -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20100706/ebc62322/attachment.html>
proposed ADL 1.5 simplification
Remember that the archetypes in use today, in files with the '.adl' extension are all ADL 1.4 'legacy' archetypes. ADL 1.5 archetypes are 'adls' files; your environment can chose to use whichever you want. The legacy ones are not over-written or changed in any way by the ADL 1.5 tooling (ADL 1.5 flat-form archetypes are saved in '.adlf' files. ) - thomas On 06/07/2010 09:04, David Moner wrote: > > > 2010/7/6 Peter Gummer <mailto:peter.gummer at oceaninformatics.com>> > > Sebastian Garde wrote: > > A future Archetype Editor would always replace the adl_version with > 1.5 when you save an archetype, I expect, similarly to what was done > manually with a text editor in this little experiment. This would be > the minimal change to any archetype when migrating to 1.5. > > > We should avoid this kind of automatic changes. A user might not > expect that his 1.4 ADL code is changed to a different syntax without > at least a warning, since it can have an impact on his system > implementation. As a typical example, when you open a .DOC document > with Microsoft Word 2007/2010, it will never change it to .DOCX > automatically. > > David > > -- > David Moner Cano > Grupo de Inform?tica Biom?dica - IBIME > Instituto ITACA > http://www.ibime.upv.es > > Universidad Polit?cnica de Valencia (UPV) > Camino de Vera, s/n, Edificio G-8, Acceso B, 3? planta > Valencia ? 46022 (Espa?a) > * > * -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20100706/868dcf96/attachment.html>
What does "Add reference" in Archetype Editor means
Privet Igor, this simply creates an "internal reference" to that node which you can reuse in upcoming parts of the same archetype. Of course the at code at the very end is referring to the same term_id. But the paths are difference depending on where it is referenced. Look at the 'internal reference' section or search for "use_node" within the ADL spec. I use it heavily where there are multiple appearances of a certain data node with exactly same semantics (i.e. anatomical sites) that needs qualify lots of "findings" which require further qualification of anatomical sites. When you create this reference using Archetype Editor you can drag and drop into onto any other part of the model. In the end when an operational template is generated there is no longer any difference between the 'referenced' and the 'referencing' nodes; i.e. they all become the same description of the same data item. Hope this helps...You can look into the archetype: openEHR-EHR-OBSERVATION.MST_colon.v1 Which used to come bundled with the AE installation. Cheers, -koray From: openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org [mailto:openehr-technical-boun...@openehr.org] On Behalf Of ? ??? Sent: Tuesday, 6 July 2010 6:21 a.m. To: openehr-technical at openehr.org Subject: What does "Add reference" in Archetype Editor means Hi! When right-clicking on any element in Archetype Editor there is link "Add reference" which adds a readonly element to definition. So, what does it mean? -- Best regards, Igor Lizunov -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20100706/5889e3bd/attachment.html>
proposed ADL 1.5 simplification
2010/7/6 Peter Gummer > Sebastian Garde wrote: > > A future Archetype Editor would always replace the adl_version with > 1.5 when you save an archetype, I expect, similarly to what was done > manually with a text editor in this little experiment. This would be > the minimal change to any archetype when migrating to 1.5. > > We should avoid this kind of automatic changes. A user might not expect that his 1.4 ADL code is changed to a different syntax without at least a warning, since it can have an impact on his system implementation. As a typical example, when you open a .DOC document with Microsoft Word 2007/2010, it will never change it to .DOCX automatically. David -- David Moner Cano Grupo de Inform?tica Biom?dica - IBIME Instituto ITACA http://www.ibime.upv.es Universidad Polit?cnica de Valencia (UPV) Camino de Vera, s/n, Edificio G-8, Acceso B, 3? planta Valencia ? 46022 (Espa?a) -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20100706/dc37d6c1/attachment.html>
proposed ADL 1.5 simplification
Hi David, I agree. I think the default behaviour in AE would be switchable as per user preference. i.e. save in adl 1.4 or 1.5. The file extensions will be different in any case - .adls and .adlf. Ian Dr Ian McNicoll office / fax +44(0)141 560 4657 mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 skype ianmcnicoll ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com ian at mcmi.co.uk Clinical Analyst Ocean Informatics Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, University College London openEHR Archetype Editorial Group Member BCS Primary Health Care SG Group www.phcsg.org / BCS Health Scotland On 6 July 2010 09:04, David Moner wrote: > > > 2010/7/6 Peter Gummer > > Sebastian Garde wrote: >> >> A future Archetype Editor would always replace the adl_version with >> 1.5 when you save an archetype, I expect, similarly to what was done >> manually with a text editor in this little experiment. This would be >> the minimal change to any archetype when migrating to 1.5. >> >> > We should avoid this kind of automatic changes. A user might not expect > that his 1.4 ADL code is changed to a different syntax without at least a > warning, since it can have an impact on his system implementation. As a > typical example, when you open a .DOC document with Microsoft Word > 2007/2010, it will never change it to .DOCX automatically. > > David > > -- > David Moner Cano > Grupo de Inform?tica Biom?dica - IBIME > Instituto ITACA > http://www.ibime.upv.es > > Universidad Polit?cnica de Valencia (UPV) > Camino de Vera, s/n, Edificio G-8, Acceso B, 3? planta > Valencia ? 46022 (Espa?a) > > ___ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20100706/034e7420/attachment.html>
What does "Add reference" in Archetype Editor means
Koray Atalag wrote: > Hope this helps?You can look into the archetype: openEHR-EHR- > OBSERVATION.MST_colon.v1 > Which used to come bundled with the AE installation. Hi Koray, The MST_colon archetype can still be downloaded from the old, obsolete Subversion repository: http://www.openehr.org/svn/knowledge/archetypes/dev/adl/openehr/ehr/entry/observation/openEHR-EHR-OBSERVATION.mst_colon.v1.adl That archetype isn't installed by Archetype Editor any more. These days, Archetype Editor installs a few dozen simple, representative sample archetypes, to help new users familiarise themselves with archetypes. They are clearly marked as samples to avoid mistaking them for "real" (i.e. CKM) archetypes. openEHR-EHR-ADMIN_ENTRY.sample_admission.v1.adl contains some internal references. - Peter Gummer
What does "Add reference" in Archetype Editor means
? ??? wrote: > When right-clicking on any element in Archetype Editor there is link > "Add reference" which adds a readonly element to definition. > > So, what does it mean? Hi Igor, It's an internal reference. See the ADL 1.4 specification, section 5.3.7. - Peter Gummer
proposed ADL 1.5 simplification
Peter Gummer wrote: > Sebastian Garde wrote: > > >> Not sure if this change would has an impact on the canonical MD5 >> hash generated by the Archetype Editor - ideally it would be the >> same for an archetype with or without the concept clause? >> > > > I doubt it, Sebastian. Any small changes made to an archetype today > will cause the MD5 hash to change. > > For example, open an existing archetype in a text editor and replace > its first line: > archetype (adl_version=1.4) > With this: > archetype (adl_version=1.5 Ah, that's rightso each and every archetype MD5 hash will change anyway when migrating to ADL 1.5 (with or without Tom's proposed change to remove the concept) - then removing the concept shouldn't matter. Sebastian
proposed ADL 1.5 simplification
Sebastian Garde wrote: > Not sure if this change would has an impact on the canonical MD5 > hash generated by the Archetype Editor - ideally it would be the > same for an archetype with or without the concept clause? I doubt it, Sebastian. Any small changes made to an archetype today will cause the MD5 hash to change. For example, open an existing archetype in a text editor and replace its first line: archetype (adl_version=1.4) With this: archetype (adl_version=1.5) Then open the edited archetype in Archetype Editor 2.1, select the Display tab and click on the ADL button to see what gets generated. The MD5 hash will be completely different. A future Archetype Editor would always replace the adl_version with 1.5 when you save an archetype, I expect, similarly to what was done manually with a text editor in this little experiment. This would be the minimal change to any archetype when migrating to 1.5. So what I am saying is that, no matter whether anything else has changed in the archetype, when migrating to 1.5, it would appear that the MD5 hash is going to be different anyway. - Peter Gummer
What does "Add reference" in Archetype Editor means
Hi! When right-clicking on any element in Archetype Editor there is link "Add reference" which adds a readonly element to definition. So, what does it mean? -- Best regards, Igor Lizunov -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20100706/453dcdcb/attachment.html>
