About the calculation:
Ah, I see, the assignment seems like a good solution. But why would I need a
function to calculate a score that is just a sum of a number of values, instead
of a few +-operators?
Multiplicities/data binding:
The there exists case is clear. However, what if I have four e
Thanks Pieter,
this is very useful.
On 01/02/2019 12:54, Pieter Bos wrote:
For us the main requirement of the rules is to calculate the value of
other fields based on other fields. Only the checking of assertions
has relatively little added value for the use cases our customers
encounter. I
For us the main requirement of the rules is to calculate the value of other
fields based on other fields. Only the checking of assertions has relatively
little added value for the use cases our customers encounter. I would find it
very hard to explain to any users or modelers that they can write
I'm fine with this improvements, the only thing I feel that can be
troublesome for users is having data_bindings and computed values in a
completely different format/style
El vie., 1 feb. 2019 a las 13:01, Thomas Beale ()
escribió:
> For many years, there has been a little-used capability in ADL
For many years, there has been a little-used capability in ADL which
enables basic expressions to be stated such as the following in the
Apgar Observation archetype:
*rules*
/score_sum/:
/data[id3]/events[id4]/data[id2]/items[id26]/value[id44]/magnitude =
/data[id3]/events[id4]/data[id2]/ite
5 matches
Mail list logo
