GUI-directives/hints again (Was: Developing usable GUIs)
Hi Thilo, Is great to see such enthusiasm on the subject of GUI definition & generation (subject I love). I see we have many people interested in the subject too. I think your work in exploring tools like ours, is of great importance, because without these explorations and trials we could not improve our tools (owned by the community). I really think that your work exploring the tools is as important as our work making them. Without people like you, our work is senseless. I hope to see more advance in your the exploration of the EHR-Gen next week. All your comments and thoughts will be considered to improve the tool. And anyone who want to participate in the improvement, is welcome. Of course, any questions or comments are welcome. -- Kind regards, A/C Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20101210/8a1e1169/attachment.html>
GUI-directives/hints again (Was: Developing usable GUIs)
Sorry forgot Thilo's paper info: 1. Schuler T, Garde S, Heard S, Beale T. Towards automatically generating graphical user interfaces from openEHR archetypes. Stud Health Technol Inform 2006;124:221-6. Cheers, -koray From: openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org [mailto:openehr-technical-boun...@openehr.org] On Behalf Of pablo pazos Sent: Thursday, 9 December 2010 7:39 a.m. To: openehr technical Subject: RE: GUI-directives/hints again (Was: Developing usable GUIs) Hi Ian, If I understand what Thomas said "I would suggest that the GUI templates just reference paths found in the openEHR template", the paths in a GUI Template will come "only" from openEHR templates (the structural ones), not from archetypes (this is apart from that they are technically the same thing). I think in ADL 1.4 the template specification is not complete, I would say that in 1.4 Templates are not so clear Archetype specializations. In ADL 1.5 is more clear the relationship of Templates and Archetypes. What I meant in the previous mail was: for us who have developed applications over ADL 1.4, our GUI Templates will use paths "directly" from Archetypes, instead of paths from openEHR structural Templates. -- Kind regards, A/C Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos > From: Ian.McNicoll at oceaninformatics.com > Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 17:30:38 + > Subject: Re: GUI-directives/hints again (Was: Developing usable GUIs) > To: openehr-technical at openehr.org > > Hi Pablo, > > In both ADL1.4 and 1.5 every path is still an archetype-based path. > The proposed schema for an operational template is very similar to the > XML schema of an individual archetype but obviously includes multiple > aggregated archetypes and omits any nodes which are constrained out. > > Templates are technically identical to specialised archetypes. The > difference is that specialised archetypes support templating features > such as constraining out unwanted elements and aggregating archetypes. > > The only difference between an archetype and a template is that new > content i.e. new nodes or terms cannot be added to a template. > > Ian > > Dr Ian McNicoll > office / fax +44(0)1536 414994 > mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 > skype ianmcnicoll > ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com > > > Clinical analyst, Ocean Informatics > openEHR Clinical Knowledge Editor www.openehr.org/knowledge > Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL > BCS Primary Health Care SG Group www.phcsg.org -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20101210/d59a3c51/attachment.html>
GUI-directives/hints again (Was: Developing usable GUIs)
Hi All, I've read similar work before starting with our design and found Thilo's prior work very relevant and well researched. This MIEUR 2006 paper describes a new layer of GUI model using Mozilla XUL - an XML based open web layout standard. AT the time of writing templates were not out there yet and from his discussion I reckon much of the GUI definition could be handled by templates. I now agree that pure GUI stuff must be represented elsewhere - but at the moment we find template annotations quite useful and sufficient. Be aware that our app is a Winforms one - not Web based. So the kind of GUI rules might differ from others which are almost all Web based. And one note to Thomas: we actually use templates for defining a minimum data set (yes not a maximal) for the purpose of reporting...So w have both data entry/validation and reporting layout issues. Not messaging though but we are planning to transform the openEHR instance of endoscopy report into CDA and exchange with HL7 V2.x in near future. Cheers, -koray From: openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org [mailto:openehr-technical-boun...@openehr.org] On Behalf Of pablo pazos Sent: Thursday, 9 December 2010 7:39 a.m. To: openehr technical Subject: RE: GUI-directives/hints again (Was: Developing usable GUIs) Hi Ian, If I understand what Thomas said "I would suggest that the GUI templates just reference paths found in the openEHR template", the paths in a GUI Template will come "only" from openEHR templates (the structural ones), not from archetypes (this is apart from that they are technically the same thing). I think in ADL 1.4 the template specification is not complete, I would say that in 1.4 Templates are not so clear Archetype specializations. In ADL 1.5 is more clear the relationship of Templates and Archetypes. What I meant in the previous mail was: for us who have developed applications over ADL 1.4, our GUI Templates will use paths "directly" from Archetypes, instead of paths from openEHR structural Templates. -- Kind regards, A/C Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos > From: Ian.McNicoll at oceaninformatics.com > Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 17:30:38 + > Subject: Re: GUI-directives/hints again (Was: Developing usable GUIs) > To: openehr-technical at openehr.org > > Hi Pablo, > > In both ADL1.4 and 1.5 every path is still an archetype-based path. > The proposed schema for an operational template is very similar to the > XML schema of an individual archetype but obviously includes multiple > aggregated archetypes and omits any nodes which are constrained out. > > Templates are technically identical to specialised archetypes. The > difference is that specialised archetypes support templating features > such as constraining out unwanted elements and aggregating archetypes. > > The only difference between an archetype and a template is that new > content i.e. new nodes or terms cannot be added to a template. > > Ian > > Dr Ian McNicoll > office / fax +44(0)1536 414994 > mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 > skype ianmcnicoll > ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com > > > Clinical analyst, Ocean Informatics > openEHR Clinical Knowledge Editor www.openehr.org/knowledge > Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL > BCS Primary Health Care SG Group www.phcsg.org -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20101210/94dfad1d/attachment.html>
GUI-directives/hints again (Was: Developing usable GUIs)
Hi! A very interesting discussion, thanks to everybody here! Great with all references too! On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 16:26, pablo pazos wrote: > Maybe if we change the terminology to GUI Templates and openEHR Templates, > we will not have these problems. > Or perhaps "GUI focused templates" and "Structurally focused templates" (since both will be openEHR based). Correct me if I'm wrong: If templates can specialize templates in several generations of inheritance/specialisation (This is the case, right?), then we could use the same basic annotation formalism for different purposes in different layers, only the annotation names would be different. So an example inheritance/specialisation hierarchy in a running system could be: A bunch of clinical archetypes (mostly international, and some regional ones) ...are used as building blocks in... a "structural" template (maybe national/regional) often creating a composite SECTION or COMPOSITION [add more structural layers if useful] ...that is then annotated with GUI-hints by... a set of "GUI templates" with each template fitting a different recurring use case ...for a specific GUI, the most fitting of those GUI templates is then picked and might be further annotated/specialized with yet another template layer or used directly as input to GUI-generation or GUI-building tools On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 15:55, Thomas Beale < thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com> wrote: > you have two choices: > >- A) mix it in with the languages & architectural layers you already >have >- B) create a dedicated layer or component type, and possibly dedicated >formalism if needed > > I believe there is (as usual) a context dependent gray-zone, not a clear breakpoint, regarding what annotations would be most useful to have in which layer. So, yes I agree layers are good for separation of concerns, but it is not always (at least not at an early stage) easy to forsee exactly what best fits into each layer and how many layers there should be. If the already present annotation mechanism in templates is powerful enough (Do you think it is, Koray, Pablo and others?) and if could be reused also for GUI-stuff instead of creating another different formalism, then we should take a close look at that option before thinking of specifying another mechanism for GUI-concerns. You'd still get layers (if you sensibly use specialisation) but more flexible boundaries during the needed upcoming period of collaborative experimentation and real use. On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 22:06, Koray Atalag wrote: > I think having these discussions is a great start. But it'd be great if > someone from the core group 'owns' this thread and puts some pressure on us. > Koray, what makes you exclude yourself from the "core group"? Shouldn't openEHR be a community with peers trying to solve common problems, where people like you with specific implementation experience can help collaboratively lead a specific exploration tangents at least as well as some official "core" that is busy prioritizing other important explorations. Whatever that "core" is I believe it will be actively involved in, and appreciate, the discussions. You already "own" the problem together with others owning the same problem. I think openEHR should be a platform to facilitate collective ownership of problem solving processes and solutions. Best regards, Erik Sundvall erik.sundvall at liu.se http://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/ Tel: +46-13-286733 -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20101210/9d6bfbd1/attachment.html>
GUI-directives/hints again (Was: Developing usable GUIs)
On 09/12/2010 21:37, Koray Atalag wrote: > > Hi All, > > I've read similar work before starting with our design and found > Thilo's prior work very relevant and well researched. This MIEUR 2006 > paper describes a new layer of GUI model using Mozilla XUL -- an XML > based open web layout standard. AT the time of writing templates were > not out there yet and from his discussion I reckon much of the GUI > definition could be handled by templates. I now agree that pure GUI > stuff must be represented elsewhere -- but at the moment we find > template annotations quite useful and sufficient. Be aware that our > app is a Winforms one -- not Web based. So the kind of GUI rules might > differ from others which are almost all Web based. > > And one note to Thomas: we actually use templates for defining a > minimum data set (yes not a maximal) for the purpose of reporting... > that is more or less the intention of templates. Archetypes define 'maximal' sets of data points; templates define what you actually want to use in some circumstance. > So w have both data entry/validation and reporting layout issues. Not > messaging though but we are planning to transform the openEHR instance > of endoscopy report into CDA and exchange with HL7 V2.x in near future. > It would be interesting to see if you have some 'semantic' rules you think are needed in templates, as opposed to layout rules - can you summarise? - thomas * * -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20101210/32634c16/attachment.html>
