Re: templates in .oet and .opt

[Ian McNicoll]

Agree with Pablo's description.

The Better Archetype Designer (AD) uses a new json format that takes the
place of the .oet and is closely aligned to ADL2. AD also imports and
exports .oet formats and exports .opt.

.opt is the critical 'technical' junction point from which most other
technical artefacts are derived - flattened data formats, server/ client
side validation, HTML visualisation, form rendering blah blah!

Once I have generated an .opt that is me handing the clinical models over
to the tech guys.

Ian
Dr Ian McNicoll
mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859
office +44 (0)1536 414994
skype: ianmcnicoll
email: i...@freshehr.com
twitter: @ianmcnicoll



Director, freshEHR Clinical Informatics Ltd.
CCIO inidus Ltd. i...@inidus.com
Co-Chair, openEHR Foundation ian.mcnic...@openehr.org
Hon. Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL


On Fri, 6 Sep 2019 at 15:11, Pablo Pazos  wrote:

> Hi, OET is the source format for templates on Ocean tools, that is the one
> that can be edited. Other tools might have a different source format or
> support the OET.
>
> The OPT is the final form, exported from different tools, like a big
> archetype for full documents. Depending on the tool, those can or can't be
> edited directly without the source format.
>
> Best,
> Pablo.
>
> On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 9:15 AM Georg Fette 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I am not yet very familiar with templates and I only recently started
>> digging into the documentation.
>> One thing I encountered is the distiguishment between template (.oet)
>> and operational templates (.opt).
>> I played a bit using the oceans-toolbox and transformed some .oets into
>> .opts.
>> Although the oceans-toolbox seems not capable to reimport the exported
>> .opts, it looks like both representations can be transformed into the
>> other without loss of information. E.g. in the .opt some parts of the
>> archetypes can be set to 0..0, but they still exist if needed to
>> recreate the constrain that was used to model this 0..0 (which perhaps
>> formerly was a 0..1).
>> So my questions are:
>> - Are the two representation really bidirectionally transformable into
>> each other ?
>> - For which tasks is which representations mostly used for ? Is it
>> correct to say that the former is more appropriate for modeling purposes
>> and the latter more for technical processing.
>> Greetings
>> Georg
>>
>> --
>> -
>> Dipl.-Inf. Georg Fette  Raum: B001
>> Universität WürzburgTel.: +49-(0)931-31-85516
>> Am Hubland  Fax.: +49-(0)931-31-86732
>> 97074 Würzburg  mail: georg.fe...@uni-wuerzburg.de
>> -
>>
>>
>> ___
>> openEHR-technical mailing list
>> openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
>>
>> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
>>
>
>
> --
> *Ing. Pablo Pazos Gutiérrez*
> pablo.pa...@cabolabs.com
> +598 99 043 145
> skype: cabolabs
> Subscribe to our newsletter 
> 
> http://www.cabolabs.com
> https://cloudehrserver.com
>
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
>
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
>
___
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org

Re: templates in .oet and .opt

[Pablo Pazos]

Hi, OET is the source format for templates on Ocean tools, that is the one
that can be edited. Other tools might have a different source format or
support the OET.

The OPT is the final form, exported from different tools, like a big
archetype for full documents. Depending on the tool, those can or can't be
edited directly without the source format.

Best,
Pablo.

On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 9:15 AM Georg Fette 
wrote:

> Hi,
> I am not yet very familiar with templates and I only recently started
> digging into the documentation.
> One thing I encountered is the distiguishment between template (.oet)
> and operational templates (.opt).
> I played a bit using the oceans-toolbox and transformed some .oets into
> .opts.
> Although the oceans-toolbox seems not capable to reimport the exported
> .opts, it looks like both representations can be transformed into the
> other without loss of information. E.g. in the .opt some parts of the
> archetypes can be set to 0..0, but they still exist if needed to
> recreate the constrain that was used to model this 0..0 (which perhaps
> formerly was a 0..1).
> So my questions are:
> - Are the two representation really bidirectionally transformable into
> each other ?
> - For which tasks is which representations mostly used for ? Is it
> correct to say that the former is more appropriate for modeling purposes
> and the latter more for technical processing.
> Greetings
> Georg
>
> --
> -
> Dipl.-Inf. Georg Fette  Raum: B001
> Universität WürzburgTel.: +49-(0)931-31-85516
> Am Hubland  Fax.: +49-(0)931-31-86732
> 97074 Würzburg  mail: georg.fe...@uni-wuerzburg.de
> -
>
>
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
>
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
>


-- 
*Ing. Pablo Pazos Gutiérrez*
pablo.pa...@cabolabs.com
+598 99 043 145
skype: cabolabs
Subscribe to our newsletter 

http://www.cabolabs.com
https://cloudehrserver.com
___
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org

templates in .oet and .opt

[Georg Fette]

Hi,
I am not yet very familiar with templates and I only recently started 
digging into the documentation.
One thing I encountered is the distiguishment between template (.oet) 
and operational templates (.opt).
I played a bit using the oceans-toolbox and transformed some .oets into 
.opts.
Although the oceans-toolbox seems not capable to reimport the exported 
.opts, it looks like both representations can be transformed into the 
other without loss of information. E.g. in the .opt some parts of the 
archetypes can be set to 0..0, but they still exist if needed to 
recreate the constrain that was used to model this 0..0 (which perhaps 
formerly was a 0..1).

So my questions are:
- Are the two representation really bidirectionally transformable into 
each other ?
- For which tasks is which representations mostly used for ? Is it 
correct to say that the former is more appropriate for modeling purposes 
and the latter more for technical processing.

Greetings
Georg

--
-
Dipl.-Inf. Georg Fette  Raum: B001
Universität WürzburgTel.: +49-(0)931-31-85516
Am Hubland  Fax.: +49-(0)931-31-86732
97074 Würzburg  mail: georg.fe...@uni-wuerzburg.de
-


___
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org

usage of references to archetype instances in templates ?

[Georg Fette]

Hi,
Does openEHR contain the paradigm to reference instances of archetypes 
in template instances ? When I want to use an archetype instance in two 
different templates I have two possibilities, 1. to duplicate the data 
and store it in the serialized objects of both template instances or 2. 
to store the archetype instance once and reference it from within the 
template instances. The 2nd option would have the advantage that I could 
change the data of the archetype instance and both template instances 
immediately would point to correct data. Unfortunately the templates can 
constrain the archetype differently any change on an archetype instance 
would have to trigger a check on all references of this instance to 
ensure that all constaints on the used archetype are still met. This 
trigger mechanism doing those checks could be a bit complicated.
If such a reference mechanism is used in openEHR, where in the 
documentation is it specified ?

Greetings
Georg

--
-
Dipl.-Inf. Georg Fette  Raum: B001
Universität WürzburgTel.: +49-(0)931-31-85516
Am Hubland  Fax.: +49-(0)931-31-86732
97074 Würzburg  mail: georg.fe...@uni-wuerzburg.de
-


___
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org