Re: Archetype relational mapping - a practical openEHR persistence solution

This is correct. The usual way I do this with an object model is to create a set of P_XXX classes, where 'P_' means 'persistent form'. The P_ classes are a transform of the main IM (whatever it is) that does things like * stringifying a lot of low-level fields * ignoring derived fields *

Re: Archetype relational mapping - a practical openEHR persistence solution

based on a quick look, my reaction is the same, unless they have some very interesting Archetype => Schema transformation. On 25/01/2016 14:25, pazospa...@hotmail.com wrote: I talked about this approach with a colleague from China during MEDINFO. The problem is your schema grows with your a

concept maps (Cmaps) for archetyping?

this group of researchers appears to have created an approach to modelling health information using something a bit more powerful than mindmaps. They seem to know about CDA but not openEHR. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3833511/pdf/gahmj.2012.1.4.003.pdf - thomas _

Re: New EHRServer v0.5 and roadmap

Hi Pablo, I watched the latest video, very nice. Why not consider a revoiced version in English some time? I think it's mature enough to start trying to get a wider audience. - thomas On 14/01/2016 05:42, pablo pazos wrote: Hi all! I'm very excited to share the good news with all my openE

Specifications Committee meeting Feb 2016 - have your say

There will be a SEC (Specifications Editorial Committee ) face to face meeting in Stockholm 11 and 12 February. This will do its usual work of considering next releases, processing Problem Reports (PRs), Change Requests, and an

Re: Trial of openEHR's own 'stackExchange' on the openEHR wiki

On 07/01/2016 17:12, Bert Verhees wrote: On 07-01-16 17:28, Thomas Beale wrote: I changed the wiki so that Questions is now visible read-only to non-logged in users. I have checked that this works on a test machine. Works OK now. What makes me doubt is a very obvious competition-figure

Re: Trial of openEHR's own 'stackExchange' on the openEHR wiki

I changed the wiki so that Questions is now visible read-only to non-logged in users. I have checked that this works on a test machine. - thomas On 07/01/2016 15:19, Bakke, Silje Ljosland wrote: I think for this to be useful, the site have to be readable without logging in… Regards, *Sil

Re: Trial of openEHR's own 'stackExchange' on the openEHR wiki

Bert, were you logged in? On 06/01/2016 09:33, Bert Verhees wrote: On 06-01-16 09:07, Bakke, Silje Ljosland wrote: one of the features we don't use on the wiki is 'Questions', which you can see here . There seems to be an authorization-problem, t

Trial of openEHR's own 'stackExchange' on the openEHR wiki

one of the features we don't use on the wiki is 'Questions', which you can see here . This supposedly is the same kind of function as StackExchange, which we didn't get off the ground. So maybe we should try locally. My proposal would be for som

Re: CAMSS assessment of openEHR

R-technical [mailto:openehr-technical-boun...@lists.openehr.org] *On Behalf Of *Thomas Beale *Sent:* Monday, January 4, 2016 2:57 PM *To:* openehr-technical@lists.openehr.org *Subject:* Re: CAMSS assessment of openEHR Hi Silje, I had a look at the website - it doesn't seem as if anyone is u

Re: CAMSS assessment of openEHR

Hi Silje, I had a look at the website - it doesn't seem as if anyone is using CAMSS much, if we believe this page, which contains CAMSS assessments , none of which are health related. On this page

Making FHIR work for everybody

Here is a blog post on a proposal for making FHIR work more easily with other health information architectures , including openEHR, which may interest some people here. - thomas ___

Re: Specialization depth

The error messages are actually in ODIN format, which can accommodate EN-US as well as EN, if we really want to bother with that. - thomas On 17/12/2015 07:16, Bert Verhees wrote: For US/international English spelling, we tend to use International English for all natural language, and wh

Re: Specialization depth

ARCHETYPE_ID is for AOM 1.4, ARCHETYPE_HRID is for AOM 2.0 We will rationalise all these classes in to the BASE component in Release 1.1.0 of the RM. - thomas On 17/12/2015 07:24, Bert Verhees wrote: On 16-12-15 14:05, Thomas Beale wrote: that's why it is gone in ADL2/AOM2. Th

Re: Specialization depth

On 16/12/2015 10:54, Bert Verhees wrote: On 16-12-15 11:37, Diego Boscá wrote: but there is an example of an specialized identifier in that same document e.g. "uk.nhs.clinical::openEHR-EHR-SECTION.t_encounter_report-vital_signs_headings-0001.v1" in http://www.openehr.org/releases/AM/latest/d

Re: Specialization depth

This is not a specialised identifier, it's just an identifier that has '-' characters in it, which in ADL2 are not special. Just look at the id1.x code of the root node to get the specialisation depth of any ADL2 archetype. - thomas On 16/12/2015 10:37, Diego Boscá wrote: but there is an

Re: Specialization depth

enEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org -- *Thomas Beale* Management Board, Specifications Program Lead, openEHR Foundation <http://www.openehr.org> Chief Technology Officer, Ocean Informa

ADL 1.4 specification - now in Asciidoctor format

The old ADL 1.4 spec is now online in the new format. This was done primarily to: * fix various formatting * fix syntax rendering * provide a source form of the ADL 1.4 spec in case interim releases between 1.4 and 2.0 are required

Re: Party-actor-folder relationships in hierarchy

A couple of words of advice: normally, EHR and demographics 'databases' would be separated for security and operational reasons. EHRs are not normally 'inside' any demographic entities. This section

Re: Party-actor-folder relationships in hierarchy

If people want specific changes to the specifications, please raise a Problem Report in the usual place . Otherwise we don't know what the specific shortcomings are. - thomas On 27/11/2015 09:02, Bert Verh

Re: Party-actor-folder relationships in hierarchy

Hi Bert, there is no 'policy' about treating the Demographics specification as 'inferior'. The practical point about demographics is that it is often not implemented because many clinical IT environments already have an MPI, so an openEHR EHR system typically implements the PARTY_PROXY.exte

openEHR RM Release-1.0.3 - EHR Extract - SURVEY OF USE

*If your organisation or implementation uses the openEHR EHR Extract specification PLEASE READ THIS.* Release-1.0.3 is getting close. For those with too much time on their hands, you can follow progress here on Jira . We have im

Re: Binding to multiple terminologies / code systems

On 30/10/2015 16:00, Barnet David (HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE INFORMATION CENTRE) wrote: Thomas For use (NHS in England) it’s probably at the template level (but it would be good to occasionally specify at the node level). just to be clear on this point, because this is the one I want to kn

Re: OPT2 specification, choosing terminology bindings...

looks like sharing SVGs in email is not a good idea... 2nd go ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org

OPT2 specification, choosing terminology bindings...

One of the final things to get right in ADL2 is how to choose terminology bindings, also languages and a few other settings when going from source archetypes and templates to the OPT. I have put up a draft OPT2 specification with

Re: Binding to multiple terminologies / code systems

Dave, the solution to this situation is not yet 100% clear in ADL2 (it is in ADL1.4, as others have described). We are trying to define a cleaner way to represent it in ADL2, but I'm still not clear on the requirements. It appears that the scenario you have is that since SNOMED CT, READ and

Re: Binding to multiple terminologies / code systems

The answer isn't completely simple. Some background here . If there are bindings defined for snomed_ct, read2 and ctv3 to the ac-code that appears in the archetype definition section, and no further constr

Re: Archetype publication question - implications for implementers

As a reminder, the current draft spec on versioning and lifecycle is here, and as usual, comments are welcome

Re: Archetype publication question - implications for implementers

On 19/10/2015 13:10, Heather Leslie wrote: The versioning rules have been following. This is a use case that is testing them, testing our strategy. Excellent. What does specialisation add to this? We still have a changed MD5, new archetype ID, etc… Aargh. If we specialise, what happens w

Re: Archetype publication question - implications for implementers

Hence my earlier proposal... On 19/10/2015 09:18, David Moner wrote: 2015-10-16 3:22 GMT+02:00 Heather Leslie >: ·It means that new implementers can use the corrected v1 revision and we don’t have to create a v2 for a relatively trivial p

Re: Archetype publication question - implications for implementers [ long ]

surely the obvious approach is that the stored field contains the UCUM case-sensitive code, and that applications / services use UCUM tables to render whatever display form is asked for in a client call? (I realise openEHR archetypes are not doing this; they should be...) there's another pro

Re: Archetype publication question - implications for implementers [ long ]

Eric, nice summary of issues. If I can take the liberty of pulling out what I think are your key issues to worry about + recommendations. I bolded my own subset of those ... On 10/10/2015 10:07, Eric Browne wrote: *Notes on UCUM* * UCUM does not supply normative names of units. * Some of

Re: Archetype publication question - implications for implementers

I've skimmed the replies on this thread, and I'm inclined to think everyone could be right. Problem is, they can't all be right at the same time. So considering the issue from a global deployment perspective I had the folllowing idea: * in the archetype library, we should stick to pro

OS licences - CC-BY-SA 4 compatible with GPLv3

Announced here officially - http://creativecommons.org/compatiblelicenses ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org

New adl-antlr GitHub project

above link if you are interested in using this resource, or participating in the development. - thomas -- *Thomas Beale* Management Board, Specifications Program Lead, openEHR Foundation <http://www.openehr.org> Chief Technology Officer, Ocean Informatics <http://www.oceaninformatics

Re: SNOMED CT constraint syntax - for querying instances or terminology?

On 30/09/2015 07:51, michael.law...@csiro.au wrote: Imagine instead the example was using the corresponding AMT concepts (since snomed pure doesn't have any concrete domain modelling -- I.e. numeric values). Then the focus concept would be the AMT amoxycillin Medicinal Product concept 2141501

Re: SNOMED CT constraint syntax - for querying instances or terminology?

Hi Michael, in that case, to what information base or DB could the amoxycillin query be applied? What is it for? thanks - thomas On 29/09/2015 23:19, michael.law...@csiro.au wrote: Hi Thomas, These constraints are essentially queries over the snomed definitional content (ie the Relations

SNOMED CT constraint syntax - for querying instances or terminology?

The latest version of the SNOMED CT constraint language proposes expressions like the following: Section 6.3 To find those capsules that have a strength between 500 and 800 mg (inclusive), the following expression constraint may be used: < 2

Re: openEHR and IHTSDO (SNOMED CT)

A number of approaches have been made in the recent past by openEHR and CIMI, led by Dr stan Huff. The outcome is that IHTSDO do not appear to be currently interested in a formal working relationship with the content modelling communities (openEHR, Intermountain Healthcare, CIMI, ISO 13606, .

Re: Advantage of ISO

. - thomas On 09/09/2015 18:09, Bert Verhees wrote: On 09-09-15 09:55, Thomas Beale wrote: Bert, my comments relate to software only, contributed by companies and other organisations at their own development expense. It has nothing to do with specifications, nor specification-related computatio

Re: Advantage of ISO

, copyrighted to the foundation and will always be free to use under all circumstances, as has always been the case for 15 years. This will never change. - thomas On 09/09/2015 17:24, Bert Verhees wrote: On 09-09-15 04:20, Thomas Beale wrote: On 08/09/2015 21:55, Erik Sundvall wrote: Hi! ND

Re: Advantage of ISO

On 08/09/2015 21:55, Erik Sundvall wrote: Hi! ND on the specification documents is not a big or urgent problem if there are Apace 2 licenced computable artifacts like UML-files/descriptions of all classes, ADL/AQL grammars, openEHR term lists/vocabularies and other things needed for building

Re: Advantage of ISO

ND = No Derivatives and is the Creative Commons equivalent of what W3C has in their licence . It's just designed to prevent anyone republishing altered versions of the specifications /as the original specifications /- in other words forked

Re: Advantage of ISO

ND = No Derivatives ad is the Creative Commons of what W3C has in their licence . It's just designed to prevent anyone republishing altered versions of the specifications /as the original specifications /- in other words forked publishing,

book recommendation - basic formal ontology (BFO) for biomedicine

A new book, *Building Ontologies with Basic Formal Ontology *(BFO2) has been published by Robert Arp, Barry Smith and Andrew Spear. Amazon.com

Re: Advantage of ISO

Gerard, the 'IP rights' are defined by the licences. You can read them here . The rights to use, copy and adapt are clearly defined, and include no curbs on freedom, and no requirement for payment. The only real requirement is that attribut

Re: Advantage of ISO

Gerard, I am not sure why you are pursuing this line of argument. The only interesting question here is not about any 'owner', but about the 'credible maintainer'. For openly and freely licenced IP, this is all that practically matters - the capabilities and behaviours of the maintainer with

Re: ACTION performer?

Can I suggest that a PR is raised for this ? - thomas On 27/08/2015 21:40, Ian McNicoll wrote: Hi Silje, I agree that ACTION.performer would be a useful addition (optional) to the RM. For now, I model per

Re: difference and relationship between openEHR and EN13606

Hi Bert, On 28/08/2015 16:32, Bert Verhees wrote: On 27-08-15 19:54, Thomas Beale wrote: I would suggest that CIMI has been simiplified to the point of not being directly usable as an RM by openEHR or 13606 - most of the needed context information is gone in CIMI, and it doesn't distin

Re: Archetype versioning: Skipping v1 and going straight to v2?

Hi Silje, I would not expect any problems. - thomas On 28/08/2015 23:05, Bakke, Silje Ljosland wrote: Hi everyone, We’ve bumped into an issue related to versioning of archetypes and implementing non-published versions: Several implementation projects are using archetypes from the http:/

Re: difference and relationship between openEHR and EN13606

On 28/08/2015 10:03, 王海生 wrote: could we just add a page on openEHR website to illustrate these points thx if you search on the wiki , with either '13606' or 'CIMI' you will find a lot of material. - thomas _

Re: difference and relationship between openEHR and EN13606

openEHR has an EHR Extract specification as well, which is more flexible than the 13606 one e.g. it can include information from more than one patient, and accommodates both openEHR and non-openEHR content. - thomas On 26/08/2015

Re: difference and relationship between openEHR and EN13606

On 26/08/2015 16:46, Erik Sundvall wrote: Hi! Where can one find proposals/diagrams describing the refreshed RM (reference model) in the new 13606 revision? Will 13606 keep using the old data types or harmonize more with CIMI or OpenEHR? Is there now consensus/majority regarding using ADL/AO

Re: difference and relationship between openEHR and EN13606

On 26/08/2015 13:08, Bert Verhees wrote: On 26-08-15 14:03, Diego Boscá wrote: I agree with most of the points, but I'm curious why you say that 13606 does not support AQL (and in any case wouldn't be "AQL does not support 13606"?) Yes, that is a good question, I did not know that AQL was consid

Re: ACTION performer?

On 27/08/2015 10:18, Bakke, Silje Ljosland wrote: So it’s possible to specify the role of each participant? yep - the PARTICIPATION type has 'function' i.e. 'role' (this name was adopted from 13606 a long time ago - probably too late to change). - thomas

Re: ACTION performer?

Normally you would use participations. Sent from my HTC - Reply message - From: "Bakke, Silje Ljosland" To: "openehr-technical@lists.openehr.org" Subject: ACTION performer? Date: Thu, Aug 27, 2015 10:00 Hi all, According to Norwegian law, the performer or main performer of a procedur

Re: AQL ANTLR4-grammar

On 24/08/2015 11:38, Bert Verhees wrote: On 24-08-15 15:36, Thomas Beale wrote: Antlr4 rule capabilities and particularly pattern matching is weaker than yacc/lex (in some cases quite a lot weaker), Of course, Yacc/lex can only be used to generate C-code. It's functionality in pattern mat

Re: AQL ANTLR4-grammar

ehr-aql-syntax Some progress has also been made towards EBNF for ADL at: https://github.com/aanastasiou/adl_ebnf I hope this helps, had a quick look at the MedInfo stuff and it looks really exciting! All the best Athanasios Anastasiou From: openEHR-tec

Re: AQL ANTLR4-grammar

Antlr4 rule capabilities and particularly pattern matcing is weaker than yacc/lex (in some cases quite a lot weaker), but it's more concise for the production rules, and as you say, it works for any output side. So that's a big win. Over time, I expect we'll cnvert everything to Antlr4. On 2

latest updates to AD2 / AOM2 specifications

I am finalising the ADL/AOM2 specifications, mainly updating text, and incorporating content from older separate documents. It's not finished yet, but sections that may interest some people: * templates and template overlays

Re: ADL versions 1.4, 1.5 and 2.0

created to DL version 1.5 or 2.0? Are all the answers in the published document http://www.openehr.org/releases/trunk/architecture/am/adl2.pdf ? Regards Dave Barnet Health and Social Care Information Centre NHS England, UK -- Ocean Informatics <http://www.oceaninformatics.c

Re: Term set for DV_PARSABLE.formalism

Hi Pablo, in openEHR, a terminology id of 'local' normally refers to terms inside an archetype; each archetype is its own terminology. This makes sense for clinical terms in an archetype, but not, I don't think, for terms to do with data formats. We can easily add these to the openEHR vocabul

Re: Term set for DV_PARSABLE.formalism

On 28/07/2015 18:49, pablo pazos wrote: If that's the case, we lose the coding system / terminology of the mime types that are defined. It would be better to make DV_PARSABLE.formalism of type CODE_PHRASE instead of String and use "local" for the terminology_id of those formalisms that doesn'

Re: Archetype editor, CKM and v0 & v1

mailing list openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org -- Ocean Informatics <http://www.oceaninformatics.com/> *Thomas Beale Chief Technology Officer* +44 7792 403 613 Specification Program, /open/EHR <http://www.ope

Re: Archetype editor, CKM and v0 & v1

Technically speaking, if we want to properly match any archetype in a slot, we need a regex that will match any level of versioning id. Since matched archetypes will eventually all have 3-part versions (but today might have only 1-part versions), we need to match thngs like .v0 .v1 .v0.0.1 .

Re: VERSION.lifecycle_state options

Sebastian, I think this is about right. I think 'immutable' in law and 'immutable' in information systems have to be understood as different things. The law is always local, so I think the best that could be done is a standard kind of attestation whose reason for change was something like 'fi

Re: VERSION.lifecycle_state options

On 09/07/2015 12:53, Erik Sundvall wrote: Hi! Is a new type of VERSION.lifecycle_state the best to solve the described use-case? Won't the "correcting a typo change" or "we forgot a thing" use-cases etc still always be there even for things written as binding contracts? Is it perhaps enough

Re: openEHR specifications - the future is Asciidoctor + MagicDraw?

Athanasios, excellent suggestion. I haven't even looked at building in syntax diagrams right now, but your timing is perfect - I was contemplating how to put the ADL grammar into the new style spec in a nice way. Currently grammar is generated as an HTML page (as per links on this wiki page

openEHR specifications - the future is Asciidoctor + MagicDraw?

Back at the September 2014 roadmap meeting *we agreed to move from the current specifications documentation *in FrameMaker to a modern tool, preferably text-based. This wiki page shows various alternatives under

Re: Updated Vim mode for ADL syntax

repair in terminal, I hope you get it distributed with vim, as some other programming languages, like C, are supported default. Regards Bert Op 23 jun. 2015 18:46 schreef "Thomas Beale" <mailto:thomas.be...@oceaninformatics.com>>: I have uploaded new vim syntax colourisi

Updated Vim mode for ADL syntax

I have uploaded new vim syntax colourising files , for those who use vim. I have included a dark blue background custom colour scheme as well. Have a look at the screen shots - I have tried to be somewhat scientific about the co

openEHR@ StackExchange - update

To succeed with openehr.StackExchange.com, the committers phase needs 200 total. We particularly *need people who want to ask questions* to commit (do it here ). Secondly, 50% of those committers need 200+ reputation on any other Stac

openEHR @ StackExchange - phase 2 - commitment

We did it... but did I mention that it's only phase 1? Those of you who looked carefully will have realised that getting your own stackexchange area isn't easy . But - let's see how we go. We are now in the 'commit' phase, which means gathering enough people

nearly there - openEHR @ StackExchange - 2 questions to go

If anyone has any votes left (each user has 5), here is what to do: * login to the openEHR Area51 StackExchange page * find the two questions with < 10 votes (currently on 6 and 8) - near the bottom of the page - and UPVOTE them

Re: openEHR @ StackExchange - getting close

On 12/06/2015 16:50, Diego Boscá wrote: I think it could be also interesting to answer the questions we know the answer for, to show there are also experts and discussion out there ;D If you look at 'hardware-recommendations', another new StackExchange area in the 'Commitment' phase (openEHR i

Re: openEHR @ StackExchange - getting close

On 12/06/2015 16:50, Diego Boscá wrote: I think it could be also interesting to answer the questions we know the answer for, to show there are also experts and discussion out there ;D I have not figured out whether that's what they want or not - but if we assume that the 'example' questions d

Re: openEHR @ StackExchange - getting close

We are getting closer to the next step. We have 76 followers. We still need 17 questions with 10 votes. We have the requisite number of questions, it's just a case of people using their votes on them (don't worry if they don't really

Re: VERSION.lifecycle_state options

I think we need a clear definition of the difference between 'complete' and 'final'... On 10/06/2015 15:59, Sebastian Iancu wrote: :) final is final! Even though consent was given on wrong data... I guess if needed on application level it can be overruled under some special conditions (spec

Re: VERSION.lifecycle_state options

I suspect that the idea of 'final' requires something more like a 'locked for modification' flag. But nothing is guaranteed to be immutable - what if the consent was given, and the committed information was considered clinically 'final' but then a simple typo error (e.g. patient name, or the

Re: openEHR @ StackExchange - progress

Yes - please don't vote higher than 10. These questions are 'example' questions - this is the community testing phase of StackExchange. I'm not sure if the questions get trashed later on or not, but we have to assume for now that they are used solely for gauging community size and interest.

openEHR @ StackExchange - progress

For all those who suffer from 'not enough expert resources for openEHR' you can make it happen - if we can create an openEHR StackExchange area. To get a StackExchange area, we still need to get 16 more followers and create 38 more example questions with a score of 10 or more

Re: Cleaning up the wiki... more space consolidation?

ore active in keeping things up to date. Next question: the Projects wiki space contains software development projects - should these pages also just go under the Developers space? If people agree with this idea I'll do it. - thomas On 25/05/2015 10:57, Thomas Beale wrote: We appear to

Re: openEHR @ StackExchange

On 25/05/2015 12:16, Diego Boscá wrote: I would assume it can be both: a question could be just about specs (just the "openEHR" tag) or about any specific implementation (e.g. "openEHR" and "java") yep - that's how I think it would work. - thomas _

openEHR @ StackExchange

On 25/05/2015 11:00, Diego Boscá wrote: Agree with both. Probably we should go review the mailing lists to identify which kind of questions are usually asked by newcomers. Also, we should use stackoverflow more, with dedicated tags to openEHR. I created a new site proposal for openEHR on Stac

Re: Cleaning up the wiki...

On 25/05/2015 11:00, Diego Boscá wrote: Agree with both. Probably we should go review the mailing lists to identify which kind of questions are usually asked by newcomers. Also, we should use stackoverflow more, with dedicated tags to openEHR. Do we need to do anything special to make stackov

Cleaning up the wiki...

+ C# + Python + Ruby + thoughts? - thomas -- Ocean Informatics <http://www.oceaninformatics.com> *Thomas Beale Chief Technology Officer* +44 7792 403 613 Specification Program, /open/EHR <http://www.openehr.org/> Honorary Research Fellow, UCL <http://www.chime.

Re: Template Designer - remove slot

On 04/05/2015 16:11, pablo pazos wrote: Awesome, I'll add this to the TD JIRA. Do anyone remember where that JIRA is? -- Here is a new tracker for the TD - please add it here. - t

AOM Translation details - can we have a concrete proposal?

As we process outstanding PRs, I discovered an old one from Sebastian Garde - SPECPR-24, that initially reports the need for better translation meta-data. Silje started a thread on more recent requirements here to which some of us replied. Could we have a concrete proposal - maybe a synthesi

Re: Have your say on existing Problem Reports

Note that you can vote on these PRs as well, according to what you think is most important to be fixed. - thomas On 09/05/2015 15:10, Thomas Beale wrote: All, there are 114 Problem Reports (PRs) being processed by the Specifications Editorial Committee (SEC) right now, here on the SPECPR

Have your say on existing Problem Reports

he SEC to convert these to Change Requests (CRs) that will be the basis of the next few releases of openEHR. If you want to make comments or review any of these PRs (or even raise new ones, but please make sure, no duplicates!) then feel free to visit the SPECPR tracker and do so. thanks -

Technical and clinical lists now have searchable archive.

We have uploaded the technical and clinical list archives to mail-archive.com, which is a web-searchable interface to the lists. Technical list here Clinical list here

(ignore} technical list archiving test message

test #1 ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org

Licensing of specs and artifacts

ta.v0.0.1.adls>data is as follows. archetype (adl_version=2.0.5; rm_release=1.0.2; generated) openehr-test_pkg-WHOLE.full_meta_data.v0.0.1 language original_language = <[ISO_639-1::en]> description original_author = < ["name"] = <"Thomas Be

Specifications program roadmap - have your say

the main text to add detail etc. All comments will be read by the SEC, and incorporated into the roadmap (i.e. the CRs that result from the analysis we are doing). please report any problems with access, logging in etc to admin at openehr.org <mailto:admin at openehr.org>

OpenEHR and Oracle XML DB problems

Indeed, it would be a great thing. The reason it doesn't exist so far, is that to be useful we need synthesised data sets that have some realistic statistical spread of values. Since we are talking at multiple levels - not just vital signs measurements, but covariance of all kinds of measureme

OpenEHR and Oracle XML DB problems

On 16/04/2015 06:46, Bert Verhees wrote: > >>> >>> I think it is a stupid rule in the XML-Schema standard. >> >> I just hit this in doing the AOM2 schema. It's a completely senseless >> rule, clearly a hangover from 'document' thinking - nothing to do >> with 'data' thinking. I ended up replacin

OpenEHR and Oracle XML DB problems

On 15/04/2015 17:28, Bert Verhees wrote: > On 15-04-15 17:19, Dmitry Baranov wrote: >> Sorry Bert ) I had to explain that Oracle 11 is a business >> requirement, not a hardware limitation. >> >>> Just do it, and then it should run fine, although you have to change >>> the >>> XML-Schemas (a bit)

AOM2 initial working XSDs and example validating XML output.

I have been working with the AML (Archetype Modelling Language) team recently, and as a result have produced a set of XSDs for AOM2. These can be found here in Github. Notes: * it's initial work, very unlikely not t

ADL 2 Workbench update - alpha of next release available

anyone is welcome to do this - please report problems here . thanks - thomas On 03/02/2015 15:43, pablo pazos wrote: > I will have some free time next week, do you want me to beta test

ADL 2 Workbench update - alpha of next release available

On 03/02/2015 15:17, pablo pazos wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > Does it have ADL 1.5 / 2 editing capabilities? partial. You can create a new archetype, template, specialised archetype by right-click on the appropriate node in the explorer of the library you are in. You can then either a) use the ADL so

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >