13606 revisited - list proposal

[Gerard Freriks]

 present technical 13606 layer.

I foresee a strict separation between the technical 13606 standard (as we know 
it) and a semantic artefact layer (that we will need to wok on)
The technical layer is very generic, healthcare a-specific.
The Semantic artefact layer will have some health specific items incorporated: 
e.g. Observation, etc. but even then contain many health a-specific constructs 
that can be used outside of healthcare.
This thinking will have consequences for the present 13606 parts 1, 2 and 3.

Some of the ideas ended up in the EN13606 WIKI.

> 
>> As you know, my opinion is that an harmonisation or at least a seamless
>> transition between 13606 and openEHR is a key element to succeed.
> 
> I totally agree.

What I'm after is a specification in the public domain owned by a formal SDO.
And that is what we all need.


> 
> Bringing the communities tighter together is another important thing.
> The way some leaders sometimes talk of the other organisation's
> approaches might not be helpful in that sense. Those of you having
> formal powers in each organisation please ask your leaders to speak as
> honestly and nicely as possible of each others
> organisations/communities/approaches, or else please change leaders.
> 
> Best regards,
> Erik Sundvall
> erik.sundvall at liu.se http://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/  Tel: +46-13-286733
> 
> ___
> 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/20111215/b2765baa/attachment.html>

13606 revisited - list proposal

[Thomas Beale]

I have started a wiki page 
<http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/spec/openEHR+2.x+RM+proposals+-+lower+information+model>
 
for this 'lower RM' simplification. The top contains the existing 
models, feel free to add to the 'problem' list (why are we 
simplifying?). If you have a candidate solution to offer, please put it 
under a new heading - you will see a 'Candidate B' ready to be used by 
someone. If we proceed in that fashion, I think we can keep the 
proposals clear.

NOTE: I have only half done my proposal, Candidate A, so don't bother 
looking at it yet.

- thomas

On 15/12/2011 14:54, pablo pazos wrote:
> Hi Erik,
>
> I want to implement some simplifications of the item_structure in the 
> EHRGen ( http://code.google.com/p/open-ehr-gen-framework/ ) we talked 
> about this: 
> http://www.openehr.org/mailarchives/openehr-clinical/msg02231.html
>
> My focus is on the persistence layer, because we persist data using an 
> ORM (object-relational mapping) component, and the complexity of the 
> relational schema is proportional to the complexity of the object model.
>
> BTW, the EHRGen has the complete cicle of information implemented: 
> automatic gui generation (based on archetypes and our gui templates), 
> data validation against archetype constraints, data binding (creation 
> of RM structures from user data input and archetypes), persistence of 
> those structures, and getting data to show on a GUI.
>
> Now I'm experimenting with semantic queries (common SQL but based on 
> arcehtype ids and paths).
>
>
> Regards,
> Pablo.
>
> > Regarding the RM I know Tom is experimenting with simplified
> > ITEM_STRUCTURE as a BMM-schema for the AWB. Are there any other
> > RM-redesign experiments going on anywhere?
> >
> > What is happening in the 13606-world regarding thoughts about
> > practical datatypes?
> >
> > What about (optional) reusable ENTRY subtypes in the 13606 world? (see
> > http://www.openehr.org/mailarchives/openehr-technical/msg05285.html
> > under the heading "2. OBSERVATION et. al. (ISO 13606 CR)")
>

-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20111215/a48de33d/attachment.html>

13606 revisited - list proposal

[Erik Sundvall]

Hi!

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 08:52, David Moner  wrote:
> The unofficial renewal process of 13606 (or pre-SDO process, as you prefer
> :-) will start next February at the EN 13606 Association General Assembly in
> Seville with an open and public consultation.

Is there any formal link between the 13606 Association and the actual
standardisation process or is the "pre-SDO process" to be seen as
traditional lobbying?

Perhaps the best thing would be if the 13606 Association and openEHR
could bring forward a unified co-authored suggestion to the SDO
process rather than two suggestions? Perhaps we can use the new
mailing list Thomas suggested for mail conversations combined with the
wiki of the EN 13606 Association, instead of having separate mailing
lists and separate wikis for the alignment discussions in each
community?

> Before that, to prepare a
> draft starting point, during January a consultation will be made to key
> actors, implementers and users of the standard, including openEHR.

A great thing would be to actually have at least two independent
_implementations_ of change suggestions (both AM and RM) after initial
discussions but before any revisions to the standard are made. That is
how some other SDOs work with technical artefacts and it could avoid
some of the previous suboptimal approaches.

I assume AOM 1.5 is a candidate for AM? Is anybody already working on
an AOM 1.5 implementation in addition to Tom's Eiffel version? Are
there people interested in updating the Java implementation (or some
other implementation) before or during the SDO process?

Regarding the RM I know Tom is experimenting with simplified
ITEM_STRUCTURE as a BMM-schema for the AWB. Are there any other
RM-redesign experiments going on anywhere?

What is happening in the 13606-world regarding thoughts about
practical datatypes?

What about (optional) reusable ENTRY subtypes in the 13606 world? (see
http://www.openehr.org/mailarchives/openehr-technical/msg05285.html
under the heading "2. OBSERVATION et. al. (ISO 13606 CR)")

> As you know, my opinion is that an harmonisation or at least a seamless
> transition between 13606 and openEHR is a key element to succeed.

I totally agree.

Bringing the communities tighter together is another important thing.
The way some leaders sometimes talk of the other organisation's
approaches might not be helpful in that sense. Those of you having
formal powers in each organisation please ask your leaders to speak as
honestly and nicely as possible of each others
organisations/communities/approaches, or else please change leaders.

Best regards,
Erik Sundvall
erik.sundvall at liu.se http://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/? Tel: +46-13-286733

13606 revisited - list proposal

[David Moner]

Hi Stef,

There are no subscription fees, all activities are open to the public. The
only requirement is to confirm the attendance in advance because the space
will be limited.

David


2011/12/15 Stef Verlinden 

> I asume there is no subscription fee for openEHR members.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Stef
>
>
> Op 15 dec. 2011, om 11:33 heeft Gerard Freriks het volgende geschreven:
>
> For more information about the EN13606 Association and the Seville meeting
> I refer to:
> www.en13606.org
> Non-members that want to participate in this meeting are invited to
> subscribe.
>
>
>
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>
>


-- 
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/20111215/59a07d26/attachment.html>

[openEHR-announce] CIMI group goes with openEHR archetypes & UML profile

[Shinji KOBAYASHI]

Just translated to Japanese.
http://openehr.jp/news/19

Cheers,
Shinji

2011/12/14 Stef Verlinden :
> Congratulations to all who made this possible and to ourselves
>
> This is a crucial 'breaktrough' which will pave the way towards future proof
> health records which will be widely accepted and used.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Stef
>
> Begin doorgestuurd bericht:
>
> Van: Thomas Beale 
> Onderwerp: [openEHR-announce] CIMI group goes with openEHR archetypes & UML
> profile
> Datum: 14 december 2011 10:38:14 GMT+01:00
> Aan: openehr-announce 
>
> [press release from the CIMI group]
>
> The Clinical Information Modeling Initiative is an international
> collaboration that is dedicated to providing a common format for detailed
> specifications for the representation of health information content so that
> semantically interoperable information may be created and shared in health
> records, messages and documents. CIMI has been holding meetings in various
> locations around the world since July, 2011. All funding and resources for
> these meetings have been provided by the participants. At its most recent
> meeting in London, 29 November - 1 December 2011, the group agreed on the
> following principles and approach.
>
> Principles
>
> 1.?CIMI specifications will be freely available to all. The initial use
> cases will focus on the requirements of organisations involved in providing,
> funding, monitoring or governing healthcare and to providers of healthcare
> IT and healthcare IT standards as well as to national eHealth programs,
> professional organisations, health providers and clinical system developers.
>
> 2.?CIMI is committed to making these specifications available in a number of
> formats, beginning with the Archetype Definition Language (ADL) from the
> openEHR Foundation (ISO 13606.2) and the Unified Modeling Language (UML)
> from the Object Management Group (OMG) with the intent that the users of
> these specifications can convert them into their local formats.
>
> 3.?CIMI is committed to transparency in its work product and process.
>
> Approach
>
> ADL 1.5 will be the initial formalism for representing clinical models in
> the repository.
>
> CIMI will use the openEHR constraint model (Archetype Object Model:AOM).
> Modifications will be required and will be delivered by CIMI members on a
> frequent basis.
>
> A set of UML stereotypes, XMI specifications and transformations will be
> concurrently developed using UML 2.0 and OCL as the constraint language.
> A Work Plan for how the AOM and target reference models will be maintained
> and updated will be developed and approved by the end of January 2012.
>
> ?Lessons learned from the development and implementation of the HL7 Clinical
> Statement Pattern and HL7 RIM as well as from the Entry models of 13606,
> openEHR and the SMART (Substitutable Medical Apps, Reusable Technologies)
> initiative will inform baseline inputs into this process.
>
> A plan for establishing a repository to maintain these models will continue
> to be developed by the group at its meeting in January.
>
> Representatives from the following organizations participated in the
> construction of this statement of principles and plan
>
> B2i Healthcare www.B2international.com
> Cambio Healthcare Systems www.cambio.se
> Canada Health Infoway/Inforoute Sant? Canada www.infoway-inforoute.ca
> CDISC www.cdisc.org
> Electronic Record Services www.e-recordservices.eu
> EN 13606 Association www.en13606.org
> GE Healthcare www.gehealthcare.com
> HL7 www.hl7.org
> IHTSDO www.ihtsdo.org
> Intermountain Healthcare www.ihc.com
> JP Systems www.jpsys.com
> Kaiser Permanente www.kp.org
> Mayo Clinic www.mayoclinic.com
> MOH Holdings Singapore www.moh.com.sg
> National Institutes of Health (USA) www.nih.gov
> NHS Connecting for Health www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk
> Ocean Informatics www.oceaninformatics.com
> openEHR Foundation www.openehr.org
> Results4Care www.results4care.nl
> SMART www.smartplatforms.org
> South Korea Yonsei University www.yonsei.ac.kr/eng
> Tolven www.tolven.org
> Veterans Health Administration (USA) www.va.gov/health
>
> Further Information
>
> In the future CIMI will provide information publicly on the Internet. For
> immediate further information, contact Stan Huff (stan.huff at imail.org)
>
>
> ___
> openEHR-announce mailing list
> openEHR-announce at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-announce
>
>
>
> ___
> openEHR-clinical mailing list
> openEHR-clinical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical

Could YAML replace dADL as human readable AOM serialization format?

[Erik Sundvall]

Hi!

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:44, Thomas Beale
 wrote:
>> I have to say, the more I look at YAML, the more I wonder what the
>> designers were thinking. For example, in this section of the spec,
> http://yaml.org/spec/current.html#id2532720
>> multi-line quoted strings are only allowed if the 'key' is also quoted
>> (the strange looking JSON approach);
>> if the key is not quoted (i.e.
>> 'simple') then the value can't be quoted either. That's just nonsense!

Are you sure that is what it says?

"Double quoted scalars are restricted to a single line when contained
inside a simple key."

Is it not rather that you may not use a multiline double quoted string
as a KEY (at all). It does NOT forbid you to use multiline?double
quoted strings in the value, no matter if or how you quote your keys.

I have certainly seen?double?quoted values for unquoted keys coming
from serializers claiming to be specification conformant.

Are any of your keys so long and complicated that they would need
multiline quoted strings?

>> I am glad I am only implementing a serialiser, not a parser...

In many less exotic languages they are already implemented :-)
Then you configure them and then throw your object trees at them.

An example of very unfinished work in progress, using poorly readable
ordering and based on the openEHR java-ref-impl (and probably exposing
too many fields) is attached below.

Best regards,
Erik Sundvall
erik.sundvall at liu.se?http://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/? Tel: +46-13-286733

!
adl_version: '1.4'
archetype_id: openEHR-DEMOGRAPHIC-PERSON.person.v1
concept: at
original_language: ISO_639-1::pt-br
translations:
  en:
language: ISO_639-1::en
author: {email: sergio at lampada.uerj.br, organisation: Universidade
do Estado do Rio de Janeiro - UERJ, name: Sergio Miranda Freire}
description:
  original_author: {email: sergio at lampada.uerj.br, organisation:
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro - UERJ, name: Sergio Miranda
Freire & Rigoleta Dutra Mediano Dias,
date: 22/05/2009}
  other_contributors: ['Sebastian Garde, Ocean Informatics, Germany
(Editor)', 'Omer Hotomaroglu, Turkey (Editor)', 'Heather
  Leslie, Ocean Informatics, Australia (Editor)']
  lifecycle_state: Authordraft
  details:
  - language: ISO_639-1::en
purpose: Representation of a person's demographic data.
keywords: [demographic service, person's data]
use: Used in demographic service to collect a person's data.
copyright: ? openEHR Foundation
original_resource_uri: {}
  - language: ISO_639-1::pt-br
purpose: Representa??o dos dados demogr?ficos de uma pessoa.
keywords: [servi?o demogr?fico, dados de uma pessoa]
use: Usado em servi?o demogr?ficos para coletar os dados de uma pessoa.
copyright: ? openEHR Foundation
original_resource_uri: {}
  other_details: {references: 'ISO/TS 0:2008(E) - Identification
of Subject of Care - Technical Specification - International
  Organization for Standardization.'}
definition:
  attributes:
  - rm_attribute_name: details
children:
- includes:
  - expression:
  left_operand: {item: archetype_id/value, reference_type:
CONSTANT, type: STRING}
  right_operand:
item: {pattern: '(person_details)[a-zA-Z0-9_-]*\.v1'}
reference_type: CONSTANT
type: String
  operator: OP_MATCHES
  precedence_overridden: false
  type: BOOLEAN
  rm_type_name: ITEM_TREE
  occurrences: [1, 1]
  node_i_d: at0001
  any_allowed: false
  path: /details[at0001]
any_allowed: false
path: /details
  - rm_attribute_name: identities
children:
- includes:
  - expression:
  left_operand: {item: archetype_id/value, reference_type:
CONSTANT, type: STRING}
  right_operand:
item: {pattern: '(person_name)[a-zA-Z0-9_-]*\.v1'}
reference_type: CONSTANT
type: String
  operator: OP_MATCHES
  precedence_overridden: false
  type: BOOLEAN
  rm_type_name: PARTY_IDENTITY
  occurrences: [1, 1]
  node_i_d: at0002
  any_allowed: false
  path: /identities[at0002]
any_allowed: false
path: /identities
  - rm_attribute_name: contacts
children:
- attributes:
  - rm_attribute_name: addresses
children:
- includes:
  - expression:
  left_operand: {item: archetype_id/value, reference_type:
CONSTANT, type: STRING}
  right_operand:
item: {pattern: '(address)([a-zA-Z0-9_-]+)*\.v1'}
reference_type: CONSTANT
type: String
  operator: OP_MATCHES
  precedence_overridden: false
  type: BOOLEAN
  - expression:
  left_operand: {item: archetype_id/value, reference_type:
CONSTANT, type: STRING}
  right_operand:
item: {pattern: '(electr

[openEHR-announce] CIMI group goes with openEHR archetypes & UML profile

[王海生]

her Information
>>
>> In the future CIMI will provide information publicly on the Internet. For
>> immediate further information, contact Stan Huff (stan.huff at imail.org)
>>
>>
>> ___
>> openEHR-announce mailing list
>> openEHR-announce at openehr.org
>> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-announce
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> openEHR-clinical mailing list
>> openEHR-clinical at openehr.org
>> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical
>
>___
>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/20111215/d6fdcabc/attachment.html>

Could YAML replace dADL as human readable AOM serialization format?

[Thomas Beale]

On 15/12/2011 12:51, Erik Sundvall wrote:
> Hi!
>
>
> Are you sure that is what it says?
>
> "Double quoted scalars are restricted to a single line when contained
> inside a simple key."

well I read this to say:

  * if you double quote a long String containing line breaks (if you
don't yet get into different trouble) THEN
  * this scalar cannot be the value of a 'simple key';
  * a 'simple key' is defined as:
  o A /simple key/
<http://yaml.org/spec/current.html#index-entry-simple%20key> has
no identifying mark. It is recognized as being a key either due
to being inside a flow mapping, or by being followed by an
explicit value. Hence, to avoid unbound lookahead in YAML
processors <http://yaml.org/spec/current.html#processor/>,
simple keys are restricted to a single line and must not span
more than 1024 stream
<http://yaml.org/spec/current.html#stream/syntax> characters
(hence the need for the /flow-key context/
<http://yaml.org/spec/current.html#index-entry-flow-key%20context>).
Note the 1024 character limit is in terms of Unicode characters
rather than stream octets, and that it includes the separation
<http://yaml.org/spec/current.html#separation%20space/>
following the key itself.

maybe I misunderstood that a 'simple key' can't have quotes, but in any 
case, the concept of a 'simple key', if the object of YAML is object 
data serialisation is ... pretty strange (if they are hash keys, then 
they are normal strings, there should be no problem. Not distingishing 
between hash keys and attribute names seems to be a problem in YAML as 
for JSON. Very odd design IMO). Why the syntactic structure of a 'value' 
should have any dependence on the syntactic structure of a 'key' is 
beyond me.

Anyway, for the moment I will stick with the format (for Strings):

 unquoted_key: "double quoted string"

this format passes the online parser tests, and handles multi-line 
strings better. Otherwise you have to use '|', '>' and or '\' markers 
all over the place.

- thomas

-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20111215/05fa19d7/attachment.html>

13606 revisited - list proposal

[Stef Verlinden]

I asume there is no subscription fee for openEHR members.

Cheers,

Stef


Op 15 dec. 2011, om 11:33 heeft Gerard Freriks het volgende geschreven:

> For more information about the EN13606 Association and the Seville meeting I 
> refer to:
> www.en13606.org
> Non-members that want to participate in this meeting are invited to subscribe.

-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20111215/163939c0/attachment.html>

13606 revisited - list proposal

[pablo pazos]

Hi Erik,

I want to implement some simplifications of the item_structure in the EHRGen ( 
http://code.google.com/p/open-ehr-gen-framework/ ) we talked about this: 
http://www.openehr.org/mailarchives/openehr-clinical/msg02231.html 
My focus is on the persistence layer, because we persist data using an ORM 
(object-relational mapping) component, and the complexity of the relational 
schema is proportional to the complexity of the object model.
BTW, the EHRGen has the complete cicle of information implemented: automatic 
gui generation (based on archetypes and our gui templates), data validation 
against archetype constraints, data binding (creation of RM structures from 
user data input and archetypes), persistence of those structures, and getting 
data to show on a GUI.
Now I'm experimenting with semantic queries (common SQL but based on arcehtype 
ids and paths).

Regards,Pablo.
> Regarding the RM I know Tom is experimenting with simplified
> ITEM_STRUCTURE as a BMM-schema for the AWB. Are there any other
> RM-redesign experiments going on anywhere?
> 
> What is happening in the 13606-world regarding thoughts about
> practical datatypes?
> 
> What about (optional) reusable ENTRY subtypes in the 13606 world? (see
> http://www.openehr.org/mailarchives/openehr-technical/msg05285.html
> under the heading "2. OBSERVATION et. al. (ISO 13606 CR)")

  
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20111215/428ef9aa/attachment.html>

Could YAML replace dADL as human readable AOM serialization format?

[Thomas Beale]

On 15/12/2011 11:31, Thomas Beale wrote:
> I have to say, the more I look at YAML, the more I wonder what the
> designers were thinking. For example, in this section of the spec,
http://yaml.org/spec/current.html#id2532720

> multi-line quoted strings are only allowed if the 'key' is also quoted
> (the strange looking JSON approach); if the key is not quoted (i.e.
> 'simple') then the value can't be quoted either. That's just nonsense! I
> am glad I am only implementing a serialiser, not a parser...
>
> - thomas
>
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>

Questions about the relationship between Instruction, workflow and Action

[pablo pazos]

small contribution on this is that maybe ADMIN ENTRIES could also 
trigger/record Instruction state changes (without changing the instruction 
itself).  Is that the way you have implemented that? So the state of the 
instruction is carried in the record of the action (if appropriate). Is that 
recorded on ACTION.instruction_details.wf_details? Thanks a lot!regards,Pablo.  
   
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20111215/edf76e59/attachment.html>

13606 revisited - list proposal

[Gerard Freriks]

Dear Pablos,

Internally in the EN13606 Association I started to work on this renewal.
The EN13606 Association will start to think about all 5 parts of the standard.

With respect to 13606 part 1 - the reference model- I think we will have 
discussions on topics such as:
- scope
- Folders
- Semantic links
- the structure below the Entry Class
- the type of relationships between the Composition/section classes used to 
structure documents and the Entry, Cluster and Element classes that define the 
clinical content.

Possibly other members will have their own topics they want to put on the table.
In our EN13606 Association meeting in February in Seville we start the 
discussions after a consultation phase.
openEHR will be part of this consultation phase. Any input from openEHR is 
welcomed.
A WIKI page will be started anytime soon on our website.
After these discussions our suggestions will be submitted to CEN/tc251 and 
ISO/tc215.

For more information about the EN13606 Association and the Seville meeting I 
refer to:
www.en13606.org
Non-members that want to participate in this meeting are invited to subscribe.

Gerard Freriks
+31 620347088
gfrer at luna.nl




On 15 dec. 2011, at 05:03, pablo pazos wrote:

> Great! this will be THE opportunity to think about an IM 2.0, and the first 
> topic on my wishlist is the simplification of ITEM_STRUCTURE & children :D 
> 
> -- 
> Kind regards,
> Ing. 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/20111215/0d9c5f74/attachment.html>

Could YAML replace dADL as human readable AOM serialization format?

[Thomas Beale]

I have to say, the more I look at YAML, the more I wonder what the 
designers were thinking. For example, in this section of the spec, 
multi-line quoted strings are only allowed if the 'key' is also quoted 
(the strange looking JSON approach); if the key is not quoted (i.e. 
'simple') then the value can't be quoted either. That's just nonsense! I 
am glad I am only implementing a serialiser, not a parser...

- thomas

13606 revisited - list proposal

[pablo pazos]

Hi Gerard, is good to know! please publish the link to the wiki discussion when 
available.

-- 
Kind regards,
Ing. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez
LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez
Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos

Subject: Re: 13606 revisited - list proposal
From: gf...@luna.nl
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:33:17 +0100
To: openehr-technical at openehr.org



Dear Pablos,
Internally in the EN13606 Association I started to work on this renewal.The 
EN13606 Association will start to think about all 5 parts of the standard.
With respect to 13606 part 1 - the reference model- I think we will have 
discussions on topics such as:- scope- Folders- Semantic links- the structure 
below the Entry Class- the type of relationships between the 
Composition/section classes used to structure documents and the Entry, Cluster 
and Element classes that define the clinical content.
Possibly other members will have their own topics they want to put on the 
table.In our EN13606 Association meeting in February in Seville we start the 
discussions after a consultation phase.openEHR will be part of this 
consultation phase. Any input from openEHR is welcomed.A WIKI page will be 
started anytime soon on our website.After these discussions our suggestions 
will be submitted to CEN/tc251 and ISO/tc215.
For more information about the EN13606 Association and the Seville meeting I 
refer to:www.en13606.orgNon-members that want to participate in this meeting 
are invited to subscribe.

Gerard Freriks+31 620347088gfrer at luna.nl



On 15 dec. 2011, at 05:03, pablo pazos wrote:Great! this will be THE 
opportunity to think about an IM 2.0, and the first topic on my wishlist is the 
simplification of ITEM_STRUCTURE & children :D 

-- 
Kind regards,
Ing. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez
LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez
Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos


___
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/20111215/b2b20f4b/attachment.html>

13606 revisited - list proposal

[pablo pazos]

That's the simplification we need to the IM 2.0! :D

-- 
Kind regards,
Ing. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez
LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez
Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos

> From: yampeku at gmail.com
> Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:30:46 +0100
> Subject: Re: 13606 revisited - list proposal
> To: openehr-technical at openehr.org
> 
> technically speaking, CLUSTER is already simpler in current 13606 model :)
> 
> 2011/12/15 pablo pazos :
> > Great! this will be THE opportunity to think about an IM 2.0, and the first
> > topic on my wishlist is the simplification of ITEM_STRUCTURE & children :D
> >
> > --
> > Kind regards,
> > Ing. 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/20111215/242f8ce5/attachment.html>

13606 revisited - list proposal

[Adolfo Muñoz Carrero]

Dear Thomas,

I also think it's a good idea.

Regards,

 Adolfo Mu?oz

El 15/12/2011 11:04, Rong Chen escribi?:
> Great idea, Thomas!
> /Rong
>
> On 15 December 2011 10:29, Isabel Rom?n Mart?nez  
> wrote:
>> Dear Thomas,
>> I think it is a good idea.
>> Best Regards,
>> Isabel
>>
>> El 15/12/2011 10:01, Marcelo Rodrigues dos Santos escribi?:
>>
>> Dear Thomas,
>>
>> The creation of this list will be an excellent contribution to promote the
>> harmonization process. In my opinion the alignment of these two initiatives
>> is a concrete step to achieve interoperability among EHR systems.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Marcelo
>>
>> 2011/12/15 Seref Arikan
>>
>> Hi Tom,
>> Yes, such a list would be good.
>>
>> Regards
>> Seref
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:49 AM, Thomas Beale
>>   wrote:
>>
>>
>> At the CIMI meeting last week and elsewhere, I have noticed a lot of
>> interest in the ISO 13606 2012 revision, specifically in a) whether the
>> openEHR and 13606 reference models can be brought together for part 1 of
>> the revision and b) in finalising ADL/AOM 1.5 for providing a new
>> snapshot to ISO for part 2.
>>
>> It seems to me that it would be useful to have a dedicated place to
>> discuss this, so I would like to propose a new mailing list,
>> 13606-alignment at openehr.org
>>
>> Does this seem like a useful idea?
>>
>> - thomas beale
>>
>> ___
>> openEHR-technical mailing list
>> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
>> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> openEHR-technical mailing list
>> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
>> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> openEHR-technical mailing list
>> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
>> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>>
>>
>> ___
>> openEHR-technical mailing list
>> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
>> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>>
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical


-- 
Adolfo Mu?oz Carrero
Instituto de Salud Carlos III
Unidad de Investigaci?n en Telemedicina y eSalud
Avda. Monforte de Lemos 5 - Pabell?n 14
28029 Madrid
Tfno: +34 918222182
FAX: +34 913877567


* AVISO LEGAL *
Este mensaje electr?nico est? dirigido exclusivamente a sus destinatarios,
pudiendo contener documentos anexos de car?cter privado y confidencial.
Si por error, ha recibido este mensaje y no se encuentra entre los
destinatarios, por favor, no use, informe, distribuya, imprima o copie su
contenido por ning?n medio. Le rogamos lo comunique al remitente y borre
completamente el mensaje y sus anexos. El Instituto de Salud Carlos III no
asume ning?n tipo de responsabilidad legal por el contenido de este mensaje
cuando no responda a las funciones atribuidas al remitente del mismo por la
normativa vigente.

13606 revisited - list proposal

[Rong Chen]

Great idea, Thomas!
/Rong

On 15 December 2011 10:29, Isabel Rom?n Mart?nez  
wrote:
> Dear Thomas,
> I think it is a good idea.
> Best Regards,
> Isabel
>
> El 15/12/2011 10:01, Marcelo Rodrigues dos Santos escribi?:
>
> Dear Thomas,
>
> The creation of this list will be an excellent contribution to promote the
> harmonization process. In my opinion the alignment of these two initiatives
> is a concrete step to achieve interoperability among EHR systems.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marcelo
>
> 2011/12/15 Seref Arikan 
>
> Hi Tom,
> Yes, such a list would be good.
>
> Regards
> Seref
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:49 AM, Thomas Beale
>  wrote:
>
>
> At the CIMI meeting last week and elsewhere, I have noticed a lot of
> interest in the ISO 13606 2012 revision, specifically in a) whether the
> openEHR and 13606 reference models can be brought together for part 1 of
> the revision and b) in finalising ADL/AOM 1.5 for providing a new
> snapshot to ISO for part 2.
>
> It seems to me that it would be useful to have a dedicated place to
> discuss this, so I would like to propose a new mailing list,
> 13606-alignment at openehr.org
>
> Does this seem like a useful idea?
>
> - thomas beale
>
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>
>
>
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>
>
>
>
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>
>
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>

13606 revisited - list proposal

[Isabel Román Martínez]

Dear Thomas,
I think it is a good idea.
Best Regards,
Isabel

El 15/12/2011 10:01, Marcelo Rodrigues dos Santos escribi?:
> Dear Thomas,
>
> The creation of this list will be an excellent contribution to promote 
> the harmonization process. In my opinion the alignment of these two 
> initiatives is a concrete step to achieve interoperability among EHR 
> systems.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marcelo
>
> 2011/12/15 Seref Arikan  <mailto:serefarikan at kurumsalteknoloji.com>>
>
> Hi Tom,
> Yes, such a list would be good.
>
> Regards
> Seref
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:49 AM, Thomas Beale
>  <mailto:thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com>> wrote:
>
>
> At the CIMI meeting last week and elsewhere, I have noticed a
> lot of
> interest in the ISO 13606 2012 revision, specifically in a)
> whether the
> openEHR and 13606 reference models can be brought together for
> part 1 of
> the revision and b) in finalising ADL/AOM 1.5 for providing a new
> snapshot to ISO for part 2.
>
> It seems to me that it would be useful to have a dedicated
> place to
> discuss this, so I would like to propose a new mailing list,
> 13606-alignment at openehr.org <mailto:13606-alignment at openehr.org>
>
> Does this seem like a useful idea?
>
> - thomas beale
>
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> <mailto:openEHR-technical at openehr.org>
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>
>
>
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org <mailto:openEHR-technical at openehr.org>
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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/20111215/54823acb/attachment.html>

13606 revisited - list proposal

[David Moner]

Hello Thomas,

The unofficial renewal process of 13606 (or pre-SDO process, as you prefer
:-) will start next February at the EN 13606 Association General Assembly
in Seville with an open and public consultation. Before that, to prepare a
draft starting point, during January a consultation will be made to key
actors, implementers and users of the standard, including openEHR.

There is more information at
http://www.en13606.org/index.php/activities/general-assembly-2012

As you know, my opinion is that an harmonisation or at least a seamless
transition between 13606 and openEHR is a key element to succeed.

David


2011/12/15 Thomas Beale 

>
> At the CIMI meeting last week and elsewhere, I have noticed a lot of
> interest in the ISO 13606 2012 revision, specifically in a) whether the
> openEHR and 13606 reference models can be brought together for part 1 of
> the revision and b) in finalising ADL/AOM 1.5 for providing a new
> snapshot to ISO for part 2.
>
> It seems to me that it would be useful to have a dedicated place to
> discuss this, so I would like to propose a new mailing list,
> 13606-alignment at openehr.org
>
> Does this seem like a useful idea?
>
> - thomas beale
>
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>



-- 
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/20111215/82893545/attachment.html>

13606 revisited - list proposal

[Seref Arikan]

Hi Tom,
Yes, such a list would be good.

Regards
Seref


On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:49 AM, Thomas Beale <
thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com> wrote:

>
> At the CIMI meeting last week and elsewhere, I have noticed a lot of
> interest in the ISO 13606 2012 revision, specifically in a) whether the
> openEHR and 13606 reference models can be brought together for part 1 of
> the revision and b) in finalising ADL/AOM 1.5 for providing a new
> snapshot to ISO for part 2.
>
> It seems to me that it would be useful to have a dedicated place to
> discuss this, so I would like to propose a new mailing list,
> 13606-alignment at openehr.org
>
> Does this seem like a useful idea?
>
> - thomas beale
>
> ___
> 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/20111215/92bebd9c/attachment.html>

13606 revisited - list proposal

[Chang, Wo L.]

Dear Thomas,

Wonderful and much appreciated for setting the special reflector for it, thanks!
Can you kindly provide the link how to join the new reflector?

Thanks!

--Wo

-Original Message-
From: openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org 
[mailto:openehr-technical-boun...@openehr.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Beale
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2011 7:49 PM
To: Openehr-Technical
Subject: 13606 revisited - list proposal


At the CIMI meeting last week and elsewhere, I have noticed a lot of interest 
in the ISO 13606 2012 revision, specifically in a) whether the openEHR and 
13606 reference models can be brought together for part 1 of the revision and 
b) in finalising ADL/AOM 1.5 for providing a new snapshot to ISO for part 2.

It seems to me that it would be useful to have a dedicated place to discuss 
this, so I would like to propose a new mailing list, 13606-alignment at 
openehr.org

Does this seem like a useful idea?

- thomas beale

___
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical at openehr.org
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical

13606 revisited - list proposal

[Diego Boscá]

technically speaking, CLUSTER is already simpler in current 13606 model :)

2011/12/15 pablo pazos :
> Great! this will be THE opportunity to think about an IM 2.0, and the first
> topic on my wishlist is the simplification of ITEM_STRUCTURE & children :D
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Ing. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez
> LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez
> Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos
>
>> Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 00:49:20 +
>> From: thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com
>> To: openehr-technical at openehr.org
>> Subject: 13606 revisited - list proposal
>
>>
>>
>> At the CIMI meeting last week and elsewhere, I have noticed a lot of
>> interest in the ISO 13606 2012 revision, specifically in a) whether the
>> openEHR and 13606 reference models can be brought together for part 1 of
>> the revision and b) in finalising ADL/AOM 1.5 for providing a new
>> snapshot to ISO for part 2.
>>
>> It seems to me that it would be useful to have a dedicated place to
>> discuss this, so I would like to propose a new mailing list,
>> 13606-alignment at openehr.org
>>
>> Does this seem like a useful idea?
>>
>> - thomas beale
>>
>> ___
>> openEHR-technical mailing list
>> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
>> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>

13606 revisited - list proposal

[Marcelo Rodrigues dos Santos]

Dear Thomas,

The creation of this list will be an excellent contribution to promote the
harmonization process. In my opinion the alignment of these two initiatives
is a concrete step to achieve interoperability among EHR systems.

Best regards,

Marcelo

2011/12/15 Seref Arikan 

> Hi Tom,
> Yes, such a list would be good.
>
> Regards
> Seref
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:49 AM, Thomas Beale <
> thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> At the CIMI meeting last week and elsewhere, I have noticed a lot of
>> interest in the ISO 13606 2012 revision, specifically in a) whether the
>> openEHR and 13606 reference models can be brought together for part 1 of
>> the revision and b) in finalising ADL/AOM 1.5 for providing a new
>> snapshot to ISO for part 2.
>>
>> It seems to me that it would be useful to have a dedicated place to
>> discuss this, so I would like to propose a new mailing list,
>> 13606-alignment at openehr.org
>>
>> Does this seem like a useful idea?
>>
>> - thomas beale
>>
>> ___
>> openEHR-technical mailing list
>> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
>> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>>
>
>
> ___
> 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/20111215/abbb9c23/attachment.html>

13606 revisited - list proposal

[pablo pazos]

Great! this will be THE opportunity to think about an IM 2.0, and the first 
topic on my wishlist is the simplification of ITEM_STRUCTURE & children :D 

-- 
Kind regards,
Ing. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez
LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez
Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos

> Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 00:49:20 +
> From: thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com
> To: openehr-technical at openehr.org
> Subject: 13606 revisited - list proposal
> 
> 
> At the CIMI meeting last week and elsewhere, I have noticed a lot of 
> interest in the ISO 13606 2012 revision, specifically in a) whether the 
> openEHR and 13606 reference models can be brought together for part 1 of 
> the revision and b) in finalising ADL/AOM 1.5 for providing a new 
> snapshot to ISO for part 2.
> 
> It seems to me that it would be useful to have a dedicated place to 
> discuss this, so I would like to propose a new mailing list, 
> 13606-alignment at openehr.org
> 
> Does this seem like a useful idea?
> 
> - thomas beale
> 
> ___
> 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/20111215/41c00947/attachment.html>

13606 revisited - list proposal

[Thomas Beale]

At the CIMI meeting last week and elsewhere, I have noticed a lot of 
interest in the ISO 13606 2012 revision, specifically in a) whether the 
openEHR and 13606 reference models can be brought together for part 1 of 
the revision and b) in finalising ADL/AOM 1.5 for providing a new 
snapshot to ISO for part 2.

It seems to me that it would be useful to have a dedicated place to 
discuss this, so I would like to propose a new mailing list, 
13606-alignment at openehr.org

Does this seem like a useful idea?

- thomas beale