fyi: US Veterans Administration Open Source RFI

[Tim Cook]

On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 13:02 +, Tony Shannon wrote:

>  From my perspective this move must have significance to the openEHR
> community. Thoughts please..

WorldVista is the obvious choice.

--Tim


-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Should this list receive notifications for changes to ADL reference archetypes & schemas?

[Tim Cook]

On Fri, 2011-01-14 at 14:19 +1100, Rene Spronk (Ringholm) wrote:
> If it's a series of notifications one should consider using a RSS feed - 
> those that wish to track the notifications will have the capability .. 
> and it's not yet another e-mail list.

Excellent point Rene. 


-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Should this list receive notifications for changes to ADL reference archetypes & schemas?

[Tim Cook]

On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 14:32 +, Thomas Beale wrote:

> Could I encourage people to reply to this post if:
>   * you hate the idea of these notifications coming to this list
>   * you really like the idea of notifications coming to the list
>   * you want to receive notifications by by some other channel
> thanks

I choose the third one.  There should be a mailing list for the
development of ADL and tools.

My 2 cents.

Tim


  


-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc
Project Lead - Multi-Level Healthcare Information Modeling
http://www.mlhim.org 

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

GUI-directives/hints again (Was: Developing usable GUIs)

[Tim Cook]

On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 11:56 +0100, Olof Torgersson wrote:
> 
> 
> In the openEHR case there is a specific domain and also specifications
> (archetypes/templates) which you make the task easier than trying to
> do it generally

Exactly, we have some researchers here doing exactly that work.  I am
certain that their results will be open sourced.


--Tim



-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

GUI-directives/hints again (Was: Developing usable GUIs)

[Tim Cook]

Hi Tom,

On Sun, 2010-12-05 at 12:28 +, Thomas Beale wrote:
> The current design of ADL 1.5 is that template ids will be declared in
> the data (since they are just like archetype ids) - see
> http://www.openehr.org/svn/specification/TRUNK/publishing/architecture/am/knowledge_id_system.pdf
> 
> So it is really about the mechanisms for sharing archetypes and
> templates. If specific templates are made available for sharing, then
> they will be used, just like archetypes. If locally produced
> specialised archetypes are made available for sharing, the same for
> them; otherwise the receiver system has to revert back to whatever
> archetypes and templates it can access.

...

> Archetypes contain slots; templates fill them and remove unwanted
> archetype data points (generally most of them in any given template).
> It is a matter for discussion whether templates should ever be allowed
> to add new data points the way an archetype can. 

Thanks for these clarifications.  They are *very* important points to
consider.

IMHO, if templates are permitted to add to the constraints published by
an archetype then it changes the basic design paradigm.  

Something to consider very seriously.

Regards,
Tim



-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

GUI-directives/hints again (Was: Developing usable GUIs)

[Tim Cook]

Hi Tom,

On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 21:48 +, Thomas Beale wrote:
> the general idea has always been that data can always be interpreted
> by a receiver using just the archetypes declared in the data. I
> believe this will continue to be a reliable assumption into the
> future. 

So this begs the question.  Do you think that there is a possibility
that it will NOT continue to be a reliable assumption?

> However, with the new style templates, which are essentially just
> archetypes, it may be that templates will be shared quite often as
> well, since the computing machinery that can deal with archetypes will
> be able to deal with ADL 1.5 templates as well (with only very minor
> upgrades from today, since we are talking about operational templates,
> which are essentially big archetypes). 

So in a paragraph or less can you explain the difference between
templates and simply constructing archetypes that use slots for
extendability?


> This is not going to add much information, since the information
> structures themselves (i.e. the compositional hierarchy of
> Composition, Sections, Entries etc) will reflect the structure of the
> template that was used. But if the receiver wants to validate the
> received data against the template,

But if the data validates against the archetype(s) (and therefore the
reference model) there is no need to validate against templates. 

>  and if the receiver is interested in what the template says, then it
> means they probably have some agreement with the sender institution
> about using their templates. 

Correct. So this is not a technical issue at all.  It is a
socio-political issue. 

> This will almost certainly happen with nationally standardised
> templates for referrals, discharge summaries and so on.

Makes sense.

> In summary: displaying and using the data with just the archetypes
> used to build it will be fine, since the data will reflect accurately
> the removed optional items, reduced terminology choices etc. 

Actually the data will reflect the 'chosen' option(s).  It is a
historical artifact. 

> Any site wanting to do processing against the template will
> undoubtedly be in some kind of communication with the publisher of the
> template.


Right; and otherwise the data is still valid against the archetype and
should be valid in any conforming application.  

Since my original question was asking for a use case where templates
were required to fully interpret the data.  Based on this assertion:

On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 23:04 +0100, David Moner wrote:
> This specific use further constrains archetypes and these kind of
> structural templates should be also shared as the archetypes
> themselves since they will be needed to fully interpret the data.

David and I agree that GUI directives have no place in structural
definitions. Therefore, templates should not filter out existing (valid)
data. At least I think that is what he is saying.  

But the point I am making is that templates do not have to be shared in
order to interpret the data.  Again, the only information a template can
add is what particular subsets were available at the time a specific
entry was chosen.  I simply do not see a purpose for this 'requirement'.
The data has been entered.  It  is now part of a historical record.
Since the archetype describes the data model of the concept as a set of
constraints  against the reference model. That is all the validation
required. 

Again, if I am missing something I am very interested in what it is. 

Thanks,
Tim




-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc
Project Lead - Multi-Level Healthcare Information Modeling
http://www.mlhim.org 

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

GUI-directives/hints again (Was: Developing usable GUIs)

[Tim Cook]

On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 10:45 +0100, Pariya Kashfi wrote:

> 
> I'm not sure if I understand your last phrase.
> Do you mean considering design guidelines while generating GUI

Yes.


-Tim





> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Dec 3, 2010, at 10:35 AM, Tim Cook wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 10:21 +0100, Pariya Kashfi wrote:
> > > Dear Tim,
> > > 
> > > Thank you for your response
> > > Could you please provide me with more detail about this?
> > > Would it need manual adjustment of any css/style file or would it
> > > be
> > > totally dynamic?
> > 
> > Well, you can generate dynamic UIs; but I really doubt that they are
> > useful in any real world situation.  :-) 
> > 
> > > Is it based on the templates, archetypes, or both?
> > 
> > Archetype based; with a layer of templating for local constraints.
> > 
> > > I am trying to summarize the answers from different contributors,
> > > so
> > > that we can have a better image of the situation when it comes to
> > > GUI
> > > generation.
> > 
> > Have you considered that it would be a good idea to conform to
> > MSCUI?
> > 
> > 
> > --Tim
> > 
> > 
> 
> 

-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc
Project Lead - Multi-Level Healthcare Information Modeling
http://www.mlhim.org 

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20101203/27289639/attachment.asc>

GUI-directives/hints again (Was: Developing usable GUIs)

[Tim Cook]

On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 10:21 +0100, Pariya Kashfi wrote:
> Dear Tim,
> 
> Thank you for your response
> Could you please provide me with more detail about this?
> Would it need manual adjustment of any css/style file or would it be
> totally dynamic?

Well, you can generate dynamic UIs; but I really doubt that they are
useful in any real world situation.  :-) 

>  Is it based on the templates, archetypes, or both?

Archetype based; with a layer of templating for local constraints.

> I am trying to summarize the answers from different contributors, so
> that we can have a better image of the situation when it comes to GUI
> generation.

Have you considered that it would be a good idea to conform to MSCUI?


--Tim

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

GUI-directives/hints again (Was: Developing usable GUIs)

[Tim Cook]

Hi David,

Thanks for the reply.

On Thu, 2010-12-02 at 22:54 +0100, David Moner wrote:
> Maybe I do not have the knowledge to give a valid clinical example but
> it is reasonable to think that constraining an archetype in the way a
> template does can influence the interpretation of the data.

What is reasonable is subjective; but okay.

> Imagine you have a set of archetypes and you define a template
> constraining some items to not allowed. 

Okay. 

> You use that template to fill
> some data and then you require the collaboration of a physician from
> an external organisation. You share the archetypes but not the
> template. And then the other physician fills some more data (including
> the one you marked as not allowed) and returns it to you.

Okay.

>  There is the
> problem, when you revise the data using again your own template you
> will never see part of the new data and that can affect your
> interpretation of it.

It that *is* a problem then ==> Bad application design.

> That's why structural templates must be also shared in some cases.

#1. You do not revise data in a health record.  You version it with
additional information.

#2. Any well designed archetype / template combination is going to use
the same 'data structure'.  Irregardless of the available options.  

#3.  The templates you use should only restrict data entry.  It should
not filter existing data of the same structure.  If it does; there goes
interoperability. Along with the entire premise for the use of and
purpose of archetypes.

--Tim










-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc
Project Lead - Multi-Level Healthcare Information Modeling
http://www.mlhim.org 

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

GUI-directives/hints again (Was: Developing usable GUIs)

[Tim Cook]

On Thu, 2010-12-02 at 00:50 +, Thomas Beale wrote:
> 
> Tim,
> 
> if someone designs a template that has say a more limited set of
> Snomed or other codes on a field than the original archetypes had,
> then querying the data may be enabled with the template at hand, since
> it would tell you what (reduced) set of code values could be possible
> in that field. 

So are you introducing some mind reading into this situation? Otherwise
I cannot  see any other outcome.  Because what you are telling me is
that it is somehow meaningful in discovering the rational for choosing a
Snomed code from a set as opposed to choosing the same Snomed code from
some subset.  Hopefully, my healthcare provider is choosing their codes
based on science.  Therefore they choose the correct one either way.  Of
course if the correct one was subsetted out; that just equals BAD
TEMPLATE.  

But if there is some business case for this mind reading adventure.  I
believe you'll need the luck of this guy
http://www.youtube.com/user/failblog?blend=2&ob=4#p/u/85/woCCTm5m3qY 

to get any real information.

> This is one of the most common uses of templates we are finding. 

So somehow knowing the possible choices somehow affects the actual code
in the field you are querying?

> I can imagine other thing, e.g. coding of fields that were just
> DV_TEXT in the archetype. 

While I still think that this is a bad idea anyway.  After all; it is
either free text or coded text.  Pick one. I still don't understand how
knowing what set was available is meaningful to the code chosen. 

> In ADL 1.5-land, a template is just another layer of archetyping, with
> some extra features. 

I still fail to see the need.  It seems to me to be a useless layer of
complexity.  But, I am still interested in a use case where templates
are 'needed' to 'fully interpret' the data. 

> This is distinct from any 'visual template' stuff, which I agree
> should be a distinct artefact and probably formalism.

And this level is dependent on implementation choices.  Only
applications built using the same framework can share these templates. 
If an entity is going to dictate presentation options and layout then
they are likely (IMO) going to do so in the context of the same
framework.   


--Tim

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

GUI-directives/hints again (Was: Developing usable GUIs)

[Tim Cook]

On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 23:04 +0100, David Moner wrote:
> The important here is to distinguish ?specific use? from ?local use?.
> In my mind, a specific use is to define a use case where only a part
> of the archetypes or several archetypes are used. This is related to
> data structures. For example, to keep only the part of the blood
> pressure archetype that is important for the Primary Care measurement
> of vital signs. This specific use further constrains archetypes and
> these kind of structural templates should be also shared as the
> archetypes themselves since they will be needed to fully interpret the
> data.

Hmmm,I am very interested in hearing about a use case where these
templates are 'needed' to 'fully interpret' the data.  

Thanks,
Tim

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

GUI-directives/hints again (Was: Developing usable GUIs)

[Tim Cook]

IMO templates are an implementation specific issue and should not be
part of the reference model.  Archetypes that express a concept as a
maximal dataset are sufficient for interoperability.  Local templates
are just that; local templates.  Certain implementations may share
templates between applications but I dare say any attempt to 'standard'
across implementations is wheel-spinning.

If people are expecting magic pop-out-of-the-box applications then they
are taking something mind-altering.  :-)

My 2 cents,

Tim


On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 18:08 +, Ian McNicoll wrote:
> Hi Olof,
> 
> I agree this is a significant missing piece of the reference model and
> I am not sure how close the overall ADL 1.5 spec is to being finalised
> but the operational template definition appears to be very stable and
> can act as a reference point for coalescing various local template
> implementations and tooling developments. Thomas has already added
> ADL1.5 support to the ADL Workbench and the specs seem to me to be
> stable enough to start implementation in Java. I think the issue is
> lack of time/resource, rather than immaturity of the specifications -
> it would be interesting to get Rong's take on this but I suspect he
> implemented a great deal of the current Java model prior to a stable
> RM being specified. Indeed I would only expect a truly stable
> specification to emerge after some implementation experience.
> 
> IMO most real-world implementations which strive for interoperability
> and maximally-defined archetypes will almost all work via operational
> templates for validation, code -generation GUI integration. I don't
> think we have to wait for the full ratification of ADL1.5 and template
> spec to start doing interesting things in downstream support, assuming
> that the opt definition is pretty stable.  The issues of extra
> directives and extensions are important at this stage as arguably some
> should be supported in the operational template, as I discussed above.
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 1 December 2010 17:19, Olof Torgersson  
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > When it comes to templates, what I would like to see is that they are
> > finalized and become a part of standard implementations such as the Java
> > reference model. This is something I've been waiting for since I first
> > viewed this list a couple of years ago.
> > Then, as a next step one could start discussing various extensions,
> > directives etc.
> > Regards
> > Olof Torgersson
> > 1 dec 2010 kl. 13.24 skrev Erik Sundvall:
> >
> > Hi All!
> > There was a related discussion regarding GUI-directives/hints around june
> > 2008, that I tried to summarize in the post
> >  http://www.openehr.org/mailarchives/openehr-technical/msg03755.html
> > As you will see that post is somewhere in the middle of the thread, so you
> > can find other interesting things before and after that post in the
> > archives.
> > Now, if I understand things correctly there is now implementatin experience
> > from at least three projects regarding GUI-hints/directives (please add more
> > if you know any):
> > - Zilics
> > (http://www.openehr.org/mailarchives/openehr-technical/msg03767.html)
> > - GastrOs Endoscopy Application by Koray Atalag et.al.
> > - Open EHR-Gen by Pablo Pazos et.al.
> > What about trying to formalize some recommendations based on this
> > experience, and perhaps even write a piece of specification draft that fits
> > the new ADL 1.5 thinking regarding templates and archetypes.
> > Would it be possible for anybody from any of the three projects to start a
> > wiki page to describe your GUI-directives/hints and then we could compare
> > them all and get a discussion going on the list possibly followed by some
> > community driven development of a draft specification to try out.
> > 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
> >
> >
> 
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical

-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc
Project Lead - Multi-Level Healthcare Information Modeling
http://www.mlhim.org 

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key f

More on ISO 21090 complexity

[Tim Cook]

Dr D Lavanian,

Just so I understand what you are saying.  Are you promoting what is in
this email as a solution or the stuff from your website?  

"Put simply,  we are a One-Stop Shop for all of your needs in the
Healthcare technology Domain. Be it strategy, software design, ergonomy
validation, software, hardware, medical equipment, project management,
clinical content management, field trials/testing, marketing  or bundled
turnkey services - we do it all.  Our services are listed on the pane to
your right."


Maybe you just have a guilty conscious for taking Australian's money?

I dunno...I can't figure it out.

Cheers,
Tim


On Sat, 2010-11-20 at 19:38 +0530, Dr Lavanian wrote:
> Dear friends,
> My thoughts on this debate wrt complexity of HL7 and similar such
> standards as also the slow pace of adoption:
>  
> I think it is time we went back to basics (especially when a simple
> thing like describing Blood pressure (110/70 mmHg) can take more than
> a Kb of memory)
> The reason being that our worthy  IT compatriots wish to micro-manage
> and detail each (atomic) component of medical literature. That is not
> and will never be possible - period.
> The results of all this - >>  huge groups and sub groups to make ever
> more complex "standards"(V12.2.53) millions of bucks to
> create, sustain and propagate such "standards" >> millions more to
> train thousands of people to learn this (mostly unwanted 'language'),
> thousands more to program it >> spawning of hundreds of (unnecessary)
> support industries to care for this/these "Standard(s)" >> and so on
> and so forth. 
> Of course all of this is awfully good for business (mine included),
> job creation, pay hikes and promotions. BUT...(my conscious
> bleats)who finally pays?? we all know that >> ultimately the
> poor patient!! and in countries like the UK. every citizen! I
> think it is a case of the cure being worse than the ailment.
>  
> Remember, doctors have their own standards. I can read a case history
> written in English, on a plain A4 sheet of paper, by a clinician from
> any part of the globe (and vice versa) and understand every word (if I
> am of that specialty). And we have been doing this for more than 200
> years. So let us not wrap tons of extraneous information to the
> already large medical knowledge pool.
> Informatics is good and does help clinicians (see my company's logo),
> but in the right dosesa toxic dose (more than LD50) can kill.
> We have now reached (IMHO) a stage where our 'Help' is actually
> becoming a big fat obstruction.
>  
> I say, "KISS" (Keep it simple Sd!). I do believe that a real
> standard should be one that does the job and is simple enough to self
> learn in a day or two. Elegance not diarrhoea is the need of the day.
>  
> Bottom line - we now need to seriously think about going back to
> basics and simplify - simplify - simplify.
>  
> I welcome comments from my worthy colleagues .
>  
> With warm regards,
>  
> Dr D Lavanian
> MBBS,MD
> CEO and MD
> HCIT Consultant
> www.hcitconsultant.com
>  
> Certified HL7 Specialist
> Member- American Medical Informatics Association
> Member HIMSS
> Senior Consultant and Domain Expert - Healthcare Informatics and
> TeleHealth
>  
> Former Vice President - Healthcare Products, Bilcare Ltd
> Former Vice President - Software Division, AxSys Healthtech Ltd
> Former Co-convener Sub committee on Standards , Governmental Task
> force for Telemedicine
> Former Vice President - Telemedicine (Technical), Apollo Hospitals
> Group
> Former Deputy Director Medical Services, Indian Air Force
> Office: +91 20 32345045
> Mobile: +91-9970921266
> - Original Message - 
> From: pablo pazos 
> To: openehr technical 
> Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 3:01 AM
> Subject: RE: More on ISO 21090 complexity
> 
> 
> It's hard get both: standard by consensus and to base
> standards on good design practices.
> 
> I think the point of the discussion is: what model (or way of
> modeling) is good and why?
> 
> On one hand we have the HL7 way of modeling things, that do
> not follows the best known practices but is accepted by many
> parties. (HL7 models are tight coupled with XML Schemas, for
> exmple, the "choice" construcor in the diagrams is a bad way
> of modeling things that can be modeled better with subclassing
> in UML, as every developer that works with HL7 v3 knows, this
> adds complexity to the development).
> 
> In the other hand we have some models that follow the best
> design practices, but are acepted by a group of "friends".
> 
> The strong point in one is the weak point in the other. So, in
> reality, we have to live with a god and with many atheists,
> and believe in both.
> 
> -- 
> Kind regards

Templates, node identifiers and data instances

[Tim Cook]

On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 16:55 +0100, Sebastian Garde wrote:
> Hi Seref,
> 
> I have the same problem sometimes with PDFs from the openEHR space in
> Firefox.
> Often it works, but sometimes I get the error you experience.

Works for me w/Firefox 3.6.12 on Ubuntu

--Tim


-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Why is OpenEHR adoption so slow?

[Tim Cook]

On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 22:19 +, Seref Arikan wrote:
> I personally see this big bootstrapping requirement as a unique
> problem of this domain, 

Compared to creating your own world class web server in the mid 1990's?

RE: http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html 
=
Unlike other software development efforts done under an open source
license, the Apache Web Server was not initiated by a single developer
(for example, like the Linux Kernel, or the Perl/Python languages), but
started as a diverse group of people that shared common interests and
got to know each other by exchanging information, fixes and suggestions.

As the group started to develop their own version of the software,
moving away from the NCSA version, more people were attracted and
started to help out, first by sending little patches, or suggestions, or
replying to email on the mail list, later by more important
contributions.

When the group felt that the person had "earned" the merit to be part of
the development community, they granted direct access to the code
repository, thus increasing the group and increasing the ability of the
group to develop the program, and to maintain and develop it more
effectively.

We call this basic principle "meritocracy": literally, government by
merit.
=

At that point in history there wasn't an Apache Foundation.  It was
people working together.  Openly, based on their interest and merit they
were given access to participate.  Right now the BUS FACTOR for the
openEHR Specifications is ONE! Same as it has been since the beginning.
I won't repeat Erik's points about archetype licensing.  But as you can
see; the only thing 'open' in openEHR are the specifications as
published and handed to you.  [Okay, there are a couple of tools but no
one has created a community around any of them.]  If you want to
translate the specifications to another language check to see what hoops
you have to jump through and software you have to purchase.  Want to
setup your own local CKM?  It is open source right?  Well, all except
for the fact you have to purchase the proprietary engine it runs on.  

> and that's why I've been suggesting the things I've been writing. 
> I know that there are many paths an open source initiative and
> business model can take, but I'd like to have that discussion with
> clear suggestions/list for work items, and people who will be
> responsible with it. 

I agree.  Of course you get to decide what you consider responsible
also. :-)

I have a story for you that I like to call; "The Tale of Two Companies".

Two "open"? companies; and their differences. I personally know the CEOs
of both. 

The first is Rob Page of Zope Corp.  He doesn't like or even today
really understand open source.  However, he did listen to his advisors
and investors and open sourced what he considered to be their most
prized possession.  He did not try to control where the technical
aspects of the specifications for the product went as far as overall
design.  He let the community and his internal engineers collaborate
openly and even went on to later release Zope Enterprise Objects (ZEO)
as open source.  Today, the Zope Tool Kit is a huge robust library of
tools used and supported by a large international community.  Something
that one small company could have never accomplished. 

Sam Heard of Ocean Informatics. Again a software company CEO that
doesn't like or understand open source.  He was convinced to open the
specifications.  But he controlled his internal staff so that they only
produced tools that run on Windows platforms.  With the exception being
the ADL Workbench and that was by accident, not by design. If you look
at the openEHR Foundation Board of Directors and the Architecture Review
Board (ARB) you can see that it is heavily controlled by Ocean
Informatics and their close associates. None of whom are or ever have
been involved in open source/open content in anyway outside of the
foundation. Changes to the specifications always come out of experience
from the commercial software that they produce.  The ARB is a closed
decision making, invited members only group. The implementations of the
specifications are of two kinds (with one exception); closed source
commercial companies and short term academic projects left to die after
the thesis is completed. 

Both of these companies have been in existence for approximately the
same length of time. 

So what is the difference? It is "community".  That is where MLHIM comes
in.  As I said, I did not embark on this lightly.  I spent a lot of
uncompensated time, money and energy trying to change the openEHR
Foundation from the inside out over the past ten years. I didn't invent
open source.  I simply recognize what works. It is impossible with the
current structure and the control issues the foundation exercises.


These are my thoughts and opinions.  I hope someone finds them more
valu

Why is OpenEHR adoption so slow?

[Tim Cook]

Hi Tom,

On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 15:51 +, Thomas Beale wrote:
> 
> Tim,
> 
> this is an interesting looking book, I downloaded it. However, as I
> and I imagine others won't get through 220 pages instantly, 

Well, that is all a matter of personal cost/benefit; isn't? :-)

> do you want to summarise what you see as the lessons from it, while
> this discussion is still warm?

Nope, not on my todo list nor in a consulting contract.  I only offered
the information there for those that think it might be helpful.  Reading
a book is a context sensitive thing anyway.

Cheers,
Tim



> - thomas
> 
> On 16/11/2010 12:44, Tim Cook wrote: 
> > Hi Tom,
> > 
> > On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 16:25 +, Thomas Beale wrote:
> > > a few points informally (I am not on any boards of any organisations,
> > > so these are my own thoughts):
> > >   * any organisation like openEHR needs some core paid people to
> > > execute key functions, and to maintain continuity. There is an
> > > 'officers' level, which runs any organisations, including
> > > admin and other support staff, and there is an operational
> > > level.
> > >   * for the operational level, there are typically posts like CTO,
> > > CMO, infrastructure management, project coordination, and so
> > > on. If the organisation is to do properly what its members
> > > want - typically 2 things: a) manage specifications/standards,
> > > including member involvement in this, and b) manage open
> > > source projects, potentially largely staffed by volunteers -
> > > then it has to have a few dedicated posts. Otherwise it
> > > becomes no-one's responsibility to actually coordinate things,
> > > keep infrastructure running etc. 
> > If these are the thoughts of, whom I consider to be, the most open
> > source/content aware person within the openEHR Foundation.  Then I
> > *highly* recommend:
> > 
> > Hippel, Eric von.
> > Democratizing innovation / Eric von Hippel.
> > ISBN 0-262-00274-4
> > 
> > (available in PDF via a CC license; btw)
> > 
> > Also, you may want to re-visit your comments about Linux.org and
> > Apache.org.  The history of how they became organizations is more
> > important than the fact that they exist today.
> > 
> > I hope you find this useful.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Tim
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ___
> > openEHR-technical mailing list
> > openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
> 
> 
> -- 
> Ocean Informatics
> Thomas Beale
> Chief Technology Officer, Ocean
> Informatics
> 
> Chair Architectural Review Board,
> openEHR Foundation 
> Honorary Research Fellow,
> University College London 
> Chartered IT Professional Fellow,
> BCS, British Computer Society 
> Health IT blog 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical

-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc
Project Lead - Multi-Level Healthcare Information Modeling
http://www.mlhim.org 

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20101117/50eed518/attachment.asc>

Why is OpenEHR adoption so slow?

[Tim Cook]

Hi Tom,

On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 16:25 +, Thomas Beale wrote:
> a few points informally (I am not on any boards of any organisations,
> so these are my own thoughts):
>   * any organisation like openEHR needs some core paid people to
> execute key functions, and to maintain continuity. There is an
> 'officers' level, which runs any organisations, including
> admin and other support staff, and there is an operational
> level.
>   * for the operational level, there are typically posts like CTO,
> CMO, infrastructure management, project coordination, and so
> on. If the organisation is to do properly what its members
> want - typically 2 things: a) manage specifications/standards,
> including member involvement in this, and b) manage open
> source projects, potentially largely staffed by volunteers -
> then it has to have a few dedicated posts. Otherwise it
> becomes no-one's responsibility to actually coordinate things,
> keep infrastructure running etc. 

If these are the thoughts of, whom I consider to be, the most open
source/content aware person within the openEHR Foundation.  Then I
*highly* recommend:

Hippel, Eric von.
Democratizing innovation / Eric von Hippel.
ISBN 0-262-00274-4

(available in PDF via a CC license; btw)

Also, you may want to re-visit your comments about Linux.org and
Apache.org.  The history of how they became organizations is more
important than the fact that they exist today.

I hope you find this useful.

Regards,
Tim



-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc
Project Lead - Multi-Level Healthcare Information Modeling
http://www.mlhim.org 

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

openEHR-13606 harmonization CR regarding CLUSTER/TABLE etc and ENTRY/OBSERVATION (Was: ISO 21090 data types too complex?)

[Tim Cook]

On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 08:52 +0930, Sam Heard wrote:
> We have learned a lot over the past few years - but I am a practicing
> clinician and the following should be read with that in mind! 

While a lot has been learned.  The universe of people actually
developing archetypes is rather small when compared to healthcare
professionals globally.  

I believe that Tom will concur that those structures were all included
because they make sense from an engineering stand-point.  At this point
in the evolution, I do not believe that we even know all that we don't
know about building knowledge structures. 

When Albert Einstein said; "Make everything as simple as possible, but
no simpler." he likely stressed the last phrase. 

As far as the comment about the ENTRY sub-classes intruding on the
ontological space.  They do not intrude, that is a point of intersection
where one represents knowledge and the other gives it structure. Both
are a requirement for interoperability.

My 2 cents.

--Tim





-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc
Project Lead - Multi-Level Healthcare Information Modeling
http://www.mlhim.org 

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

ISO 21090 data types too complex?

[Tim Cook]

On Mon, 2010-11-08 at 08:45 -0500, William E Hammond wrote:
> 
> I would like to see some real proposals to try to provide simpler, workable
> global solutions.  It's like World Peace - a great idea but probably not
> achievable.

I think that pretty much sums up the situation.  :-)

Cheers,
Tim




-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc
Project Lead - Multi-Level Healthcare Information Modeling
http://www.mlhim.org 

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Articles on Healthcare, Complexity, Change, Process, IT and the role of openEHR etc

[Tim Cook]

On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 12:13 +0100, Thomas Beale wrote:

> 
> I would certainly agree with this last statement for e-health - and it
> is a terrible way to do research. I have not encountered it in any
> other IT area, though. 

Might want to re-think that one Tom.  Can we start with DARPA? :-)

--Tim


-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Articles on Healthcare, Complexity, Change, Process, IT and the role of openEHR etc

[Tim Cook]

On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 21:25 +1100, Grahame Grieve wrote:
> You're trying to portray Health IT as some kind of 
> bizarre exemption, in that things are totally done 
> in a weird way. But I don't think it's an exemption: I 
> think most IT verticals have the same problem, which
> is that standards are being used as a stalking horse
> for research. 

I am getting mixed signals from what Tom is saying.

I am not sure if he is suggesting that Health IT (as in EHR/EMR, DSS,
CPOE, etc.) should go through the same rigorous government controlled
testing that drugs and  biomedical equipment go through?  Or, if he is
saying that "an" implementation proves usefulness?  I think that there
is a good case for the former.  Sure it would increase costs, but at
least they would work as advertised.  :-)

--Tim




-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Articles on Healthcare, Complexity, Change, Process, IT and the role of openEHR etc

[Tim Cook]

On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 17:12 +0100, Derek Meyer wrote:
> Tony,
> 
> This is very impressive piece of work.  Every since I first came
> across openEHR I have intuitively felt that it is closer to the
> 'solution' than more static attempts at standardization. So why is
> progress so slow? I've appplied some lateral thinking to this, and
> come up with what many people on this list may (at best) think
> contrarian - but at the risk of being flamed
> 
> The Case for NPfIT 2.0 www.nationalhealthexecutive.com page 52-53. 
> 
> (I'll go get my hard hat now...)

All I can say Derek; is that if you think my past medical, mental and
social history older than six months is useless information. Much less
my familial history of a few generations.  

I am very happy that you are not my physician.

Maybe if you had all of that information in a meaningful semantically
connected network.  You could practice better preventive healthcare as
opposed to band-aid, reactive medicine???   :-) 



Cheers,
Tim


-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc
Project Lead - Multi-Level Healthcare Information Modeling
http://www.mlhim.org 

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

[openEHR-announce] Message from the Board - openEHR Intellectual Property

[Tim Cook]

On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 12:15 +0200, Erik Sundvall wrote:

> Is the case that Sam or somebody else has later presented strong
> arguments to the board that could not and will not be presented to the
> community in the mailinglists or on the wiki? If arguments can not be
> presented openly, then the risk increases that people suspect the
> board or some of its members to have hidden agendas, and that is a bad
> thing for an open project like openEHR.

Thanks for that research and organization work Erik.

Whether Sam (as a Board member) or anyone else has presented any 
'strong arguments' to the other Board members is an unknown and 
frankly, I think, is irrelevant.

Over the past decade, we can probably count on our fingers the number of
threads that a Board member other than Sam has participated in on any of
the open mailing lists.  They have participated on the ARB list and in
private group mails where the audience is controlled.  IMHO, this speaks
loudly as to the desire of (or lack of desire) those members have to
demonstrate any community building leadership.  Neither has there been
any move towards true open democracy in Board membership.  

A sparkling precedent exists that free-for-all openness works. The
Internet we have today would not exist if Bob Kahn, Vint Cerf and others
at DARPA had taken the same stance that we see the openEHR Board of
Directors taking today.  Even though they worked for the US Department
of Defense.  They realized that autonomous but cooperating groups was
the best way to ensure (and insure) global uptake of the TCP/IP
specifications.  Even if they weren't perfect (the 32 bit address space
being a glowing example) they were a perfect starting place. The fact
that they could be passed around, translated, etc. gave rise to the many
implementations.

The comments regarding "protecting the users" is, IMHO, a Trojan Horse.
What I perceive that is inside the horse, I'll keep to myself for the
time being.  So, Trojan Horse or Red Herring; it is a mis-leading
reasoning.  People need to be able to FREELY copy, derive and implement
the specifications as they see fit.  No one is going to intentionally
attempt to monopolize the specifications using an embrace and extend or
any other approach. To do so would simply isolate them.

But after nearly 10 years of trying to convince them otherwise I have
given up on changing the minds and approaches of the central authority
of openEHR. This is why the Multi-Level Health Information Modeling
(http://www.mlhim.org) umbrella project was created.  In less than one
year we are already seeing project funding and porting of existing
projects to MLHIM. 

Attitude makes a difference.  You are all welcome to join us if you
wish.

Kind Regards,
Tim




-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == (upon request)
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

The Reality.......Re: informal poll: openEHR conference

[Tim Cook]

Only my suggestio. 

I have nothing else to say on the matter.  

If it is not in SA; I will not attend w/o funding.

The life of a lone consultant prevails  :-)

--Tim




On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 19:00 +, Thomas Beale wrote:
> 
> Brazil entered my mind as well. But I had not thought of going that
> far away from Rio & SP; but you are right - if you look on the map, it
> is not too many hours flight from east coast US or most of Europe. The
> down side seems to be that there are no direct flights from London,
> which probably means the same for most other European countries ; only
> Lisbon has direct flights. But it does seem like an interesting
> candidate location.
> 
> - thomas
> 
> Tim Cook wrote: 
> > On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 01:01 +0900, Vanna wrote:
> > 
> > I swore I wasn't going to respond to this; but.
> > 
> > While most of openEHR is Euro-centric.   The reality is that the most
> > obvious place ( outside of Asia) is to hold it in Natal, BR
> > http://preview.tinyurl.com/3w54c
> > 
> > It is close to everywhere (in relative terms) It is beautiful; year
> > round.
> > 
> > >From hiking to scuba you can enjoy.
> > 
> > I've enjoyed Stockholm, Amsterdam and many other places. But they are so
> > often weather dependent.
> > 
> > Natal is closest to Africa/Europe in the Americas.  It's not AS green of
> > a trip as Tom wants.  But are we really talking about a global
> > community?  
> > 
> > Okay, we have a great opensource community (by law) here.
> > 
> > Google FISL and PythonBrasil...
> > 
> > Has YOUR President ever spoke at a free software conference?
> > 
> > 
> > --Tim
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ___
> > openEHR-technical mailing list
> > openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
> >   
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Thomas Beale
> Chief Technology Officer, Ocean
> Informatics
> 
> Chair Architectural Review Board,
> openEHR Foundation 
> Honorary Research Fellow,
> University College London 
> Chartered IT Professional Fellow,
> BCS, British Computer Society 
> Health IT blog 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical


-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == (upon request)
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20091202/9eb8815a/attachment.asc>

Fwd: The Reality.......Re: informal poll: openEHR conference

[Tim Cook]

On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 17:54 +0100, Rikard L?vstr?m wrote:
> Hi Tim,
> 
> 
> You sent us a tinyurl with just: javascript:void(0)
> 

Well, see how well these Web 2.0 things work?  :-)


Here is the entire URL:

http://maps.google.com.br/maps?q=natal
+br&oe=utf-8&rls=com.ubuntu:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=Natal+-+RN&gl=br&ei=qZQWS6q6HZLOlAen_riRDw&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CA8Q8gEwAA


If that doesn't workyou are all smart enough to Google Natal, Rio
Grandge do Norte, Brasil.

You'll figure it out.

If notwell, you are on the wrong mailing list anyway!!!  :-)

--Tim



-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

informal poll: openEHR conference

[Tim Cook]

On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 14:40 +, Thomas Beale wrote:


Hm, okay...

BIG Picture here  (do we have everyone's attention) not just the US and
Western Europe?


The reality is that Europe nor North America is the center of the world.
Certainly population wise.  While as a native US Citizen and a retired
US Marine.  I believe that I have served my country and the democratic
free world well. Certainly; every single day with the weight upon my
heart that I was doing the RIGHT THING.

Some may not agree with that and I respect their opinions. But without
regard to religion and only humanitarian results.  I STAND BY MY
DECISIONS!

I spoke recently with Sam 
Heard and I am not sure where they 
(there was a closed door meeting) want to take the openEHR Foundation.

It **IS** clear to me that they are confused about
opensource/opencontent.   

**THEY** need to communicate with the community.   Not this one on one
crap meeting stuff.  

I'm frankly quite tired of it after almost 10 years.

I hope that you all can engage them and give them a CLUE!


--Tim







   
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

The Reality.......Re: informal poll: openEHR conference

[Tim Cook]

On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 01:01 +0900, Vanna wrote:

I swore I wasn't going to respond to this; but.

While most of openEHR is Euro-centric.   The reality is that the most
obvious place ( outside of Asia) is to hold it in Natal, BR
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3w54c

It is close to everywhere (in relative terms) It is beautiful; year
round.

Truth in Life

[Tim Cook]

It is easier to forgive an enemy than to forgive a friend.
  - William Blake
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

informal poll: openEHR conference

[Tim Cook]

On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 13:41 +, Thomas Beale wrote:
>  For the web/video thing - I used to be in favour of this, but it has
> been used in the last 2 IHTSDO conferences (good on them for having a
> go), and it failed miserably 

But streaming it live / recording it is still helpful and not
disruptive.

> 
> I wonder if there is some kind of global conference calendar, where we
> can see all conferences in e-health for the next 12 months?

http://www.hiww.org/  I think is as close as you get to that kind of
resource.

--Tim



-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

informal poll: openEHR conference

[Tim Cook]

On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 16:25 +, Thomas Beale wrote:
> 
> This is an initial informal question to the community about interest
> in an openEHR conference / meeting, probably initially located in
> Europe. 

Having something like this just before or just following an existing
health informatics related conference in the same or very nearby
location; saves time and money as well as possibly attracting new
attendees.

--Tim

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Mailing List Strangeness

[Tim Cook]

Hi All,

Has anyone else notice that some of the Reply-To's are set to go to a
list at CHIME instead of openehr.org?

Then they bounce because the person isn't a member of that list (I
suppose) but get forwarded On Behalf Of.

I wonder if this will cause the mailing list archives to become
fragmented in the off site archives?

Examples:

> -Original Message-
> From: openehr-technical-bounces at chime.ucl.ac.uk [mailto:openehr-
> technical-bounces at chime.ucl.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Tim Cook
> Sent: 26 November 2009 04:45


>  From: 
> Thomas Beale
> 
>  Reply-to: 
> For openEHR technical discussions
> 
>To: 
> For openEHR technical discussions
> 
>   Subject: 
> Re: Why ISM_TRANSITION of an ACTION
> is mandatory?
>  Date: 
> 11/22/2009 05:08:32 PM (Sun, 22 Nov
> 2009 19:08:32 +)

Anthony, any ideas?  

-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == (upon request)
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20091126/784742d8/attachment.asc>

MedInfo 2010

[Tim Cook]

On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 00:25 +0900, KOBAYASHI, Shinji wrote:
> Hi Tim, and Roger
> 
> I am sorry to misreading.
> Otherwise, this is the first time to challenge connectathon. I think we
> should suppose simple situation, such as same timezone, using NTP
> server(or omit subtle time mismatch)
> 
> Best regards
> Shinji


But Shinji, the "patient" doesn't see all providers at the same time.
We have to advance time in an unrealistic manner in order to SIMULATE a
real situation.

--Tim



> 
> On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 12:58:51 -0200
> Tim Cook  wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 2009-11-26 at 23:24 +0900, KOBAYASHI, Shinji wrote:
> > > Hi Roger,
> > > 
> > > I do not think we need special time server, because we can use NTP
> > > server to adjust time.
> > 
> > I think you may want to re-read Roger's email and reconsider his
> > reasoning.  It is a solution to one of the issues I pointed out (on the
> > Wiki) that could be a problem.
> > 
> > BTW: Thanks for finally sending the Workshop document.
> > 
> > --Tim
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:11:05 +0100
> > > Roger Erens  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 13:10, KOBAYASHI, Shinji  
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Hi Tim,
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry to late response. I have been troubled.
> > > > > I list up what we have to implement for connectathon bellow:
> > > > > i) Connectathon scineario(done)
> > > > > http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/resources/Connect-a-thon+Details
> > > > 
> > > > So there's only 1 journey, right? I think the encounters could use
> > > > some date-times attached to them.
> > > > 
> > > > A suggestion for tackling the first problem area mentioned: during the
> > > > connect-a-thon the connect-a-thon coordinator (c24r) should run a
> > > > time-server, to which the machines running the health information
> > > > applications should sync their time with (say every 10 or 15 minutes).
> > > > The c24r could then use the time-server to 'fast-forward' through time
> > > > and have every machine update their date and time within 10 or 15
> > > > minutes.
> > > > 
> > > > Another idea might be to use a Google Wave to broadcast changes
> > > > real-time. Or use a Skype-meeting. They seem simpler to set up than
> > > > using an IRC channel for instant messaging. I don't know about
> > > > Twitter.
> > > > 
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > 
> > > > Roger
> > > > ___
> > > > openEHR-technical mailing list
> > > > openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> > > > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > ***
> > Timothy Cook, MSc
> > 
> > LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
> > Skype ID == (upon request)
> > Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook
> > 
> > You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
> > from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 
> > 
> 


-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == (upon request)
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20091126/332312ae/attachment.asc>

MedInfo 2010

[Tim Cook]

On Thu, 2009-11-26 at 23:24 +0900, KOBAYASHI, Shinji wrote:
> Hi Roger,
> 
> I do not think we need special time server, because we can use NTP
> server to adjust time.

I think you may want to re-read Roger's email and reconsider his
reasoning.  It is a solution to one of the issues I pointed out (on the
Wiki) that could be a problem.

BTW: Thanks for finally sending the Workshop document.

--Tim




> 
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:11:05 +0100
> Roger Erens  wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 13:10, KOBAYASHI, Shinji  
> > wrote:
> > > Hi Tim,
> > >
> > > Sorry to late response. I have been troubled.
> > > I list up what we have to implement for connectathon bellow:
> > > i) Connectathon scineario(done)
> > > http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/resources/Connect-a-thon+Details
> > 
> > So there's only 1 journey, right? I think the encounters could use
> > some date-times attached to them.
> > 
> > A suggestion for tackling the first problem area mentioned: during the
> > connect-a-thon the connect-a-thon coordinator (c24r) should run a
> > time-server, to which the machines running the health information
> > applications should sync their time with (say every 10 or 15 minutes).
> > The c24r could then use the time-server to 'fast-forward' through time
> > and have every machine update their date and time within 10 or 15
> > minutes.
> > 
> > Another idea might be to use a Google Wave to broadcast changes
> > real-time. Or use a Skype-meeting. They seem simpler to set up than
> > using an IRC channel for instant messaging. I don't know about
> > Twitter.
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > 
> > Roger
> > ___
> > openEHR-technical mailing list
> > openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
> 


-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == (upon request)
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

MedInfo 2010

[Tim Cook]

On Thu, 2009-11-26 at 12:56 +0900, KOBAYASHI, Shinji wrote:
> Hi Tim,
> 
> Attached file is the document that I submitted.
> Because the scientific demo page is limited in one page, the scenario
> was shortned. 
> This manuscript has not been changed since I sent you before submission.

In that case, that sentence following my first request would have been
sufficient.  But thank you for sending the document anyway.

But you still didn't send the final submission for the workshop
following your emails titled "Urgent! about developers' workshop in
medinfo2010" dated 14 Oct 2009.
That was sent roughly 24 hours before the deadline and contained the
text:
=
"Dear colleagues,

I had a great mistaken. I found that 'three page submission' is needed
in the instruction for authours of medinfo2010. I thought the page
restriction is one page as scientific demo.
I added two pages with the web contents. I am very sorry to bothor you,
but would you please check the manuscript and add a few words to this."


I didn't have time to review before the deadline and in fact I suggested
that you drop the workshop proposal due to the short time frame and lack
of preparation of the paper.  I don't know if there were any other
reviews/changes before you submitted it; therefore I do not know what
the final looks like.

I would simply like to have a copy of the documents that you submitted;
as they were submitted with me as co-author.

I do not believe that this is an unreasonable request. 

Thank You,
Tim



-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

MedInfo 2010

[Tim Cook]

On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 21:10 +0900, KOBAYASHI, Shinji wrote:

> I realised we do not have much time to do them.
> I cannot resolve every step only by myself. Please help me. This
> connectathon needs many peoples' help.
> 

I'm sure that you'll get enough assistance.

> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:04:52 -0200
> Tim Cook  wrote:
> 
> > Well,  yes.  I have a plan.  But it would be nice to see the document(s)
> > that you submitted on our behalf.  

Are you planning to send me a copy of the papers that were submitted?

Regards,
Tim

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20091125/102f25fa/attachment.asc>

MedInfo 2010

[Tim Cook]

Hi Hugh,

Well, As I said; the idea came from a series of off list discussions
that your CEO (and other Foundation board Members) was involved in and
concerned statements that he made about how he wanted things done and
who he wanted to do them.  So, I assumed the CEO spoke for the company.
Seemed reasonable to me and their silence seemed to be agreement.

But that wasn't the point.  The point is that KOBAYASHI, Shinji
submitted the papers at the last minute and as far as I know I am listed
as a co-author on at least one of them and I have never seen a copy of
the final submission.  They (IMHO) should be posted as planning
documents on the wiki (shouldn't violate any pre-publication rules)
There hasn't been any planning/discussion going on since the papers were
published. No timeline set for testing etc.  Just curious.  Are we just
going to wait to see what happens?

--Tim

On Sun, 2009-11-22 at 22:33 +1100, Hugh Leslie wrote:
> Hi Tim
> 
> I can't speak for the openEHR foundation, but Ocean is certainly not
> planning to run this.  We have said that we want to be involved, as it
> seems like a really exciting idea, but not sure where the idea came
> from that we wanted to run it...
> 
> regards Hugh
> 
> On 21/11/2009 10:04 AM, Tim Cook wrote: 
> > Well,  yes.  I have a plan.  But it would be nice to see the document
> > that you submitted on our behalf.  
> > 
> > Since Sam Heard was adamant in his faith in your ability to lead this
> > effort I'd like to know what your plans are for putting the connectathon
> > together.  I've stated my initial plans on the wiki but I'm not certain
> > how valid they are now if this event is being run by Ocean Informatics
> > and the openEHR Foundation?
> > 
> > --Tim
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 00:30 +0900, KOBAYASHI, Shinji wrote:
> >   
> > > Hi, Tim
> > > 
> > > I submitted a proposal and now it in in the review process. I have not
> > > received any review document from the office of MEDINFO 2010. When will
> > > we receive the reviewers' comment is not described explicitly in the
> > > medinfo site, but I guess Feburuary 2010 from the experience of former
> > > medinfo.
> > > I believe that our proposal will be accept, but it is not determined.
> > > So I am waiting the result of review and preparing Ruby codes.
> > > Otherwise, we have to expose each project to connectathon even if our
> > > manuscript rejected.
> > > Do you have any plan to go on?
> > > 
> > > Best regards,
> > > Shinji
> > > 
> > > On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 12:43:20 -0200
> > > Tim Cook  wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > No News lately on the conecctathon. 
> > > > 
> > > > Is this still going on in private email sessions as it was before as I
> > > > complained about? 
> > > > 
> > > > Or has it just been dropped completely since Sinji submitted his
> > > > documents?
> > > > 
> > > > --Tim
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > -- 
> > > > ***
> > > > Timothy Cook, MSc
> > > > 
> > > > LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
> > > > Skype ID == (upon request)
> > > > Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook
> > > > 
> > > > You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
> > > > from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 
> > > > 
> > > >   
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > ___
> > openEHR-technical mailing list
> > openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
> >   
> 
> -- 
>  
> Dr Hugh Leslie MBBS, Dip. Obs. RACOG, FRACGP, FACHI 
> Clinical Director 
> Ocean Informatics Pty Ltd 
> M: +61 404 033 767   E: hugh.leslie at oceaninformatics.com  W:
> www.oceaninformatics.com 
> 
> 
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical


-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == (upon request)
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20091122/daaf0010/attachment.asc>

MedInfo 2010

[Tim Cook]

Well,  yes.  I have a plan.  But it would be nice to see the document
that you submitted on our behalf.  

Since Sam Heard was adamant in his faith in your ability to lead this
effort I'd like to know what your plans are for putting the connectathon
together.  I've stated my initial plans on the wiki but I'm not certain
how valid they are now if this event is being run by Ocean Informatics
and the openEHR Foundation?

--Tim



On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 00:30 +0900, KOBAYASHI, Shinji wrote:
> Hi, Tim
> 
> I submitted a proposal and now it in in the review process. I have not
> received any review document from the office of MEDINFO 2010. When will
> we receive the reviewers' comment is not described explicitly in the
> medinfo site, but I guess Feburuary 2010 from the experience of former
> medinfo.
> I believe that our proposal will be accept, but it is not determined.
> So I am waiting the result of review and preparing Ruby codes.
> Otherwise, we have to expose each project to connectathon even if our
> manuscript rejected.
> Do you have any plan to go on?
> 
> Best regards,
> Shinji
> 
> On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 12:43:20 -0200
> Tim Cook  wrote:
> 
> > No News lately on the conecctathon. 
> > 
> > Is this still going on in private email sessions as it was before as I
> > complained about? 
> > 
> > Or has it just been dropped completely since Sinji submitted his
> > documents?
> > 
> > --Tim
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > ***
> > Timothy Cook, MSc
> > 
> > LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
> > Skype ID == (upon request)
> > Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook
> > 
> > You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
> > from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 
> > 
> 


-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == (upon request)
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20091120/78bf1753/attachment.asc>

CEN/ISO 13606 extract tools

[Tim Cook]

On Mon, 2009-11-16 at 11:04 -0200, Marcelo Rodrigues dos Santos wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I created some CEN/ISO extracts and I'd like to validate these files.
> I'm looking for tools to work with CEN/ISO13606 extracts (parsers,
> extract generator, ADL editors for this reference model, XML schemas
> etc.). Could anyone offer help or indicate to me some references?
>  
> Thanks,
> Marcelo.

I doubt you'll find many, if any open ISO/CEN tools since those
standards are not truly open. 

I would be happy to share some guidance off list with you since you live
in a country that mandates free software by law. 

Cheers,
Tim



-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == (upon request)
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

MedInfo 2010

[Tim Cook]

No News lately on the conecctathon. 

Is this still going on in private email sessions as it was before as I
complained about? 

Or has it just been dropped completely since Sinji submitted his
documents?

--Tim


-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == (upon request)
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Documentation Desparation

[Tim Cook]

On Mon, 2009-09-28 at 17:37 +1300, Koray Atalag wrote:
> Hi Roger,
> 
> I'd really like the kind of functionality you describe and it is
> definitely desirable...

https://launchpad.net/oship/


-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Documentation Desparation

[Tim Cook]

Hi Seref,

Thanks for your concerns and well thought out points.

If you read my original posting, I didn't ask Tom to stop using
Framemaker.  I ask for some output in place of (or in addition to) the
PDF and Framemaker formats.  I'll happily accept .doc files at this
point.

It seems that we have a different perspective on what the sense of trust
in the community is also.  But that is an entirely other subject.  :-)

--Tim


On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 11:08 +0100, Seref Arikan wrote:
> Dear all, 
> I'd like to express my concerns about practical outcomes of suggested
> changes, changes based on potential benefits. I'd appreciate your
> input about the use cases we are discussing just to make sure that I
> get this right. 
> First of all, translation of openEHR documentation to other languages
> is a very critical task, which would be quite a challenge, because we
> are talking about very high quality documentation, to which I keep
> going back quite often, mostly to find out that a point that I was
> missing has already been there, expressed carefully. At one point I've
> thought about translating the docs to Turkish, my mother tongue, and
> realized that not having a Framemaker licence was the least of my
> problems. Reflecting the same quality, and more important than that,
> the same semantics consistenty in other languages is a huge challange.
> It requires understanding of the domain, the standard, and possesion
> of more than ordinary control over two languages, one being English.
> Also, as a member of openEHR community I would not like to see
> translations of the specs in the wild, with no official approval or
> inclusion from openEHR foundation, since this can easily lead to
> confusing documentation on an already confusing topic, which is
> challanging enough to master with really good docs. 
> I would like to know if there are efforts, or even intentions of
> translating this documentation to other languages, and the owners of
> these intentions. How many translations of the documentation will be
> for Spanish for example? If a person would give this task a try, due
> to reasons expressed above, he/she would have to possess quite a lot
> of time, skills  and he/she would have to communicate with openEHR to
> make sure that the outcomes do not do harm instead of doing good. My
> opinion is, this would be an effort linked to an institutuion like a
> university, or a government agency, working with openEHR. I can't see
> people working in their homes/offices on their own, doing this whole
> work, and if there are people like this, I really want to know them.
> The point? Well, the translation would mostly likely be performed by
> people with resources. A framemaker 9 licence would be the least of
> their problems. Again, please let us know if there is a person out
> there, comminting to translation, committing to ensure its quality,
> and committing to its maintanance, and is not able to move forward,
> just because he/she can't afford a licence for Framemaker. 
> I appreciate the effort for preserving the idea of openness in all
> aspects of openEHR, but I want to see Tom producing documentation
> efficiently. This is his time spend in front of a computer, and I do
> not want him working slower, or producing inferior quality output,
> which is what will obviously happen if he does not use Framemaker. I
> have to confess that I am failing to see the fairness of asking Tom to
> commit more of his time today, for potential future benefits, which
> have significant prerequisites that must be covered, before they can
> be realized.
> Having used Framemaker html, xml outputs to produce documentation for
> Eclipse plugins, I'm fine with the idea of documentation being
> exported to these formats from framemaker. PDF outputs are simply read
> only docs, doing exactly what they are created for, providing cross
> platform access to documentation. So I don't see the point of
> critisizing them for not being appropriate for translation either,
> since they are not produced to be edited at all. 
> Conclusion: please let us see concrete use cases,that justifies making
> the suggested changes, build on not only on idealism but also actual
> cost benefit analysis, and we can build a solution, or a roadmap from
> there. I'd rather see this wonderful community move forward, trying to
> stay close to its principles as much as it can, with its available
> resources, than see it watch others progress while we fail to do so
> just because we're getting ready for a better future all the time. 
> 
> Best Regards
> Seref
> 
> 
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 9:18 AM, Tim Cook
>  wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 10:08 +0200, Erik Sundvall wrote:
> 
> 

Documentation Desparation

[Tim Cook]

On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 10:08 +0200, Erik Sundvall wrote:

> In a previous license discussion I suggested the much more commonly
> understood and more open CC-BY licence
> (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) to be used for the
> specification documents, but I believe the discussion then slipped
> over to just licensing for archetypes. Can we solve this while we are
> at it?

Well, I'm still waiting to hear from the openEHR Foundation Board
(officially) on this issue since they are the only governing body we
have.

I'm not personally concerned with the notice you pointed out because my
re-use strictly adheres to items 2&3.  However, commercial
users/developers such as Ocean Informatics may or may not be in breach
of that license.  That is for the Foundation Board to decide.  There
does seem to be some conflict with some of the content notices and
licenses regarding commercial use though.  It basically depends on where
you look on the website.

The openEHR Foundation, as a legal entity in the UK (and the web site
claims globally), supported by CHIME/UCL and Ocean Informatics I assume
have sought proper legal counsel?

--Tim


-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Documentation Desparation

[Tim Cook]

On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 06:34 +0100, Thomas Beale wrote:

> Tim, can you point us to some decent documentation online done using
> the Latex approach?

Two quick ones I can think of are LyX itself:
http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/Documentation

and CLIPS:

http://clipsrules.sourceforge.net/

They aren't as 'pretty' as openEHR specs but I believe that has more to
do with the artist than the tools.

--Tim

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Documentation Desparation

[Tim Cook]

Hi Eric,

On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 11:30 +0930, Eric Browne wrote:
> T[io]m,
> 
> I don't think the documentation issue is as clear cut as Tim suggests.  
> Here are my observations:-
> 
> 1. The existing PDF documentation is excellent - far better than many  
> commercial projects. This is partly due to the use of Framemaker, but  
> mostly due to Tom's commitment, knowledge and skills.

This last phrase is no doubt true.

You made many good observations.  However, is having perfect PDFs a good
trade off to NOT having a format that can easily be translated into
other languages, a format that is supported by open source tools on
multiple platforms and a format that can be reused inside applications?

I've looked around at many open source projects and many of them have
pretty good looking documentation coming out LaTex source.  Some use LyX
to produce their PDFs some use Scribus.  But almost all of them have
multiple language versions.

Another important point is that; if Tom were hit by a bus tomorrow.?



--Tim

 
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Documentation Desparation

[Tim Cook]

Hi All,

Over the past several years I have discussed this issue with Tom Beale;
on mailing lists, off mailing lists and in person.

The issue is that Framemaker is a proprietary and basically non standard
document format.  I fully understand that Tom enjoys the desktop
publishing capabilities that it gives him and that he is familiar with
the application. 

However, we the "open content" community end up with a proprietary
format (Framemaker) and a dead-end format (PDF) for specifications that
are advertised as being open and available.  

It is almost the the ultimate sarcastic humor (on the scale of Monty
Python) that here we are trying to deliver computable healthcare
information and our own specifications are locked up in these two
formats.  We cannot manipulate them into any kind of help files in order
to integrate them into an application and god forbid we think about
machine translation into other languages.  

So, I have to ask myself, as well as all of the members of the openEHR
community.  What is wrong with the international, open standard for
document layout; (La)Tex? It seems to work well for all major
publishers, why can't it work for openEHR?

Why do we not insist on our documentation being in a format that is more
useful to us as a broad and open community?

Thanks for listening.

--Tim







-- 
***
Timothy Cook, MSc

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == (upon request)
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Medinfo2010 workshop proposal, draft

[Tim Cook]

On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 23:18 +0100, Thomas Beale wrote:
> 
> I have not had time to follow the details in this thread, but I
> endorse Tim's view on this - put some working software together. There
> are now many organisations with running openEHR solutions / systems of
> one kind or another. It is just a question of agreeing some data to
> share according to one or more scenarios. I don't believe it will be
> difficult to do this in time for the conference.
> 
> - thomas beale

Thanks Tom.

But noticeably missing from from the commited participants list is Ocean
Informatics (among others):
http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/resources/Connect-a-thon
+Participants

I wonder why?


-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

OpenEHR / ISO 13606 converter

[Tim Cook]

Hi Cati,

Thanks for this.  It looks like it can be a very useful tool.
Is the source code available?  

BTW:  My first attempt to use the tool was to upload
openEHR-EHR-OBSERVATION.blood_pressure.v1.adl from my local system (the
one released from the CKM) and convert it to ISO 13606.  The Traceback
is below.

Cheers,
Tim


type Informe de Excepci?n

mensaje 

descripci?n El servidor encontr? un error interno () que hizo que no
pudiera rellenar este requerimiento.

excepci?n 

java.io.FileNotFoundException: 
/home/archms/Poseacle/CEN-EN13606-ENTRY.blood_pressure.v1.adl (No such file or 
directory)
java.io.FileInputStream.open(Native Method)
java.io.FileInputStream.(FileInputStream.java:106)
java.io.FileInputStream.(FileInputStream.java:66)
java.io.FileReader.(FileReader.java:41)
converter.OWLConverter.doPost(OWLConverter.java:63)
javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:710)
javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:803)

nota La traza completa de la causa de este error se encuentra en los
archivos de diario de Apache Tomcat/6.0.14.
==


-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

License and copyright of archetypes

[Tim Cook]

We can have all the fun and interesting discussions we want.  What we
need is a statement from the Board of Directors.  I do not know what the
laws in England require, but in most countries the BoD of organizations
have to produce minutes of at least annual meetings to their membership.

I can't recall ever seeing anything to that effect.

Either way, the statement on the page at:
http://www.openehr.org/about/bod.html  says:

"The openEHR Board oversees the proper functioning of the openEHR
Foundation with respect to its charter and status as a not-for-profit
organisation."

I believe that this issue falls under the concepts of proper functioning
since the IP rights of donated artifacts are at stake here.

IMHO; the BoD needs to make a firm statement so that anyone donating
time to the openEHR Foundation knows what they are donating to.


--Tim

On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 11:16 +0200, Erik Sundvall wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> Sam, I remember we've had similar discussions earlier both on- and
> off-list, and I believe the result was that CC-BY was clearly the
> least encumbering and most suitable option for archetype licensing.
> 
> When it comes to copyright I think you might have misunderstood some
> things and David's interpretation below seems more correct. There is
> no conflict between Copyright and CC-licences.
> 
> Best regards,
> Erik Sundvall
> erik.sundvall at liu.se (previously erisu at imt.liu.se)
> http://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/Tel: +46-13-227579
> 
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 10:59, David Moner wrote:
> > I'm not an expert at all about licenses (and in fact, the more I read about
> > them, the less I understand :-)
> >
> > As far as I know, CC licenses are in fact a kind of "copyright clauses". The
> > copyright we all know is that of "all rights reserved". This includes the
> > attribution right, the use right, the copy right, the distribution right and
> > all that you can imagine. A CC license always maintains the attribution
> > right but allows to transfer some other rights if you wish: distribution,
> > modification and commercialization. So, I understand that the use of
> > copyright + CC is something like "some rights reserved" (which are all those
> > not covered by the CC). For example, one of those reserved rights is the
> > ability of the author to re-license his work or a new version of it.
> >
> > As you say, the best solution seems to be having both to assure the right of
> > the authors and to show clearly how archetypes can be used (those from the
> > CKM or any other public archetype repository). As I said in my previous
> > mail, this will require to add a "license" field to the archetype
> > description section to include it.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > David
> >
> > 2009/9/9 Sam Heard 
> >>
> >> Thanks for this David. I have had a look at this license some years ago
> >> and felt it was the best. It does have a proviso:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Waiver ? Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission
> >> from the copyright holder.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I think that the copyright is still a fundamental issue here and if we do
> >> not hold the copyright in some unencumbered manner then the license is not
> >> enough.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Do you think both is the best solution (copyright and CC ?
> >> Attribution-Share Alike) ?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Cheers, Sam
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> From: openehr-clinical-bounces at openehr.org
> >> [mailto:openehr-clinical-bounces at openehr.org] On Behalf Of David Moner
> >> Sent: Tuesday, 1 September 2009 9:25 PM
> >> To: For openEHR clinical discussions
> >> Cc: For openEHR technical discussions
> >> Subject: Re: License and copyright of archetypes
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Ok, that page didn't appear to me because I was not logged in the wiki
> >> when I made the search :-)
> >>
> >> It is good to see thar there are discussed more or less the same points as
> >> in my mail.
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> David
> >>
> >> 2009/9/1 Thomas Beale 
> >>
> >> There is now a page for discussing this -
> >> http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/oecom/Archetypes+-+Copyright+and+Licensing
> >>
> >> - thomas beale
> >>
> >> David Moner wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear all,
> >>
> >> These days I have been thinking about the legal issues involving the use
> >> of existing archetypes. I have seen that openEHR archetypes available on 
> >> the
> >> Clinical Knowledge Manager are all "Copyright (c) 200X openEHR Foundation".
> >> But, what does this exactly implies? I can download them freely, but can I
> >> use them in a commercial environment? Must I make public specialized
> >> archetypes or adaptations from them? Obviously, "I" is not me but anybody
> >> :-)
> >>
> >> I have searched the openEHR page and wiki but I have not found anything
> >> about this topic, just a point in the copyright notice of the 
> >> specifications
> >> linking to the non-existing page
> >> http://www.openehr.org/free_commercial_use.htm
> >>
> >> I think it would be good to start a discussion about licen

Medinfo 2010.. Re: clinically useful set of archetypes for a connectathon demo

[Tim Cook]

On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 12:22 +0100, Tony Shannon wrote:
> Thanks Eric
> 
> I'll have to admit I dont fully understand that question... not sure if
> thats a good or bad thing ;o)
> 
> I am keen to help agree on a starter set of archetypes to use for the
> demo, though I'm coming at this from purely clinical benefit and
> communication grounds. ie what is the minimum patient journey we need to
> show so that lay clinicians can look at that and say to themselves..
> "Hmm, so thats what openEHR can do.. that looks useful".

Thanks for this Tony.  You did a great job of reading my mind.  :-)
It is my hope that you can get a group of clinicians to add to the wiki
(maybe create a new page?) to develop this journey.  

Then we'll be in a better position to define the operational aspects of
the event.

> 
> Tim may be able to reply to your technical concerns..
> 

To respond to Erik.  I, for one, will not be prepared to exchange any
instances until Jan/Feb time frame.  

I think we should set a goal to do actual testing of instance data
exchange for 1 March, 2010.  That still leaves 6 months for any fine
tuning; if needed.  

Thoughts?

--Tim


> Regards,
> 
> Tony
> 
> Erik Sundvall wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > In addition to deciding on archetypes to use, I believe circulating a
> > couple of complete instance examples fairly soon (this week?) would be
> > very helpful in detecting differences in specification
> > interpretations. Having more than one archetype editor certainly
> > helped detect differences and ambiguities in other parts of the
> > specification earlier.
> >
> > Things to include in the instance examples:
> > - EHR instance data constructed using comoposition archetypes with a
> > couple of nested entry archetypes
> > - Several versions within a versionied composition, both IMPORTED
> > _VERSIONs and ORIGINAL_VERSIONs
> > - Several "creating systems" producing version branches (and possibly a 
> > merge).
> > - Realistic demographic content including some example clinicians,
> > organisations and patients.
> > - Use of the "participations" attribute of EVENT_CONTEXT
> > (- Possibly also folders)
> >
> > The examples do not right now need to use exactly the optimal
> > archetype set intended for the connectathon, we'll probably raise many
> > important implementation issues & discussions anyway.
> >
> > Question: Is CONTRIBUTION information never sent explicitly between
> > systems, but only backward-referenced via AUDIT_DETAILS via the
> > "composer" attribute of COMPOSITION?
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Erik Sundvall
> > erisu at imt.liu.sehttp://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/Tel: +46-13-227579
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 20:51, Tony Shannon wrote:
> >> Thanks Tim,
> >>
> >> Thats useful.
> >> Some other feedback from clinical colleagues would be useful on this.
> >> Certainly the high level use cases you posted , ie Newborn and then 65yo
> >> with Chronic Diseases should be useful.
> >> The detailed candidate content posted up about these 2 I'm not so
> >> concerned about directly replicating.. if we can tackle the archetypes
> >> needed to do SOAP and Summary noting these can form the basis of the
> >> material needed to support both journeys.
> >>
> >> The top 10 Emergency Archetype work Heather is currently over seeing
> >> will begin that. Not sure what timetable is realistic for broadening out
> >>  CKM input to cover the other material needed for SOAP, but Im sure it
> >> will be months rather than weeks.
> >>
> >> It may be that a few of us produce  a candidate subset of archetypes
> >> that can handle both SOAP and Summary for the Connectathon purposes
> >> ahead of any ARB/CRB checks, given the time pressures you were
> >> suggesting earlier. Dec 1 gives us about 12 weeks I guess.
> >> My sense is there must be value in agreeing a small set of very basic
> >> set of  archetypes over the next weeks for these purposes if that helps
> >> move forward the Connectathon..
> >> Others may have a view on that?
> >> #Heather do you want to comment on this thanks..
> >>
> >>
> >> Perhaps other can comment on the date time and technical issues for the
> >> connectathon.
> >>
> >> I've updated the wiki as we will be aiming to use Opereffa within the
> >> Connectathon, Serefs time will likely be constrained but thankfully he
> >> is certainly willing to try...
> 

Issues around UI technologies and bindings to back end (gjb)

[Tim Cook]

On Wed, 2009-07-29 at 17:28 +0100, Thomas Beale wrote:

> 
> > But one could build a UI that is not so mundane.  We have many more
> > properties in the model behind our forms than is currently included
> > in the templates to achieve that and soon we will have a web client
> > to complement our fat client using the same underlying data model

I want to speak on (what **I** think) is this underlying REAL problem.

This is NOT a DATA MODEL issue.  (damn I wish educators would quit
teaching this).  It is NOT a Java problem it is not a SQL problem.it
is an INFORMATION problem. 

YOUR (or my) data model don't mean crap.   It's about representing the
information in a semantically meaningful way.

..

Yep...this was an abrasive, affrontive attack on the status que...
most especially in academia and monpolistic business.


Since I am an independent consultant/researcher I guess I have the
liberty to say so.  

We can delve into technical issues if you wish and I'll be happy to
debate them with you.


But the reality is that we have been battling this for more than 45
years while the rest of the world has moved on... (see the video on
Youtube about IBM at Johns Hopkins in 1963)


Think about it.

?We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when
we created them.?
--Albert Einstein

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting
different results.
--Albert Einstein


Yeah; I like to quote him.  He was a man of great intellect and
foresight.

You *MUST* think beyond today or you are just padding your
pocket instead of caring about the tomorrow. 

--Tim Cook (2009)


-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
***
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or*
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home *
***
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20090729/42e9d7e1/attachment.asc>

Announcement of the release of Opereffa by the openEHR Foundation

[Tim Cook]

> 
> > 
> >Announcement of the release of Opereffa by the openEHR
> >  Foundation
> > 
> > The openEHR Foundation is pleased to announce the early
> > release of Opereffa ? openEHR REFerence Framework and
> > Application, under development at UCL.

Great news.

BTW: The archetype openEHR-EHR-OBSERVATION.SOAP_Clerking8.v8 fails
semantic validation in the ADL Workbench due to case sensitivity
mis-match between the file name and the ID in the archetype.

Cheers,
Tim


-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Concept Overload Caution

[Tim Cook]

Hi All,

The past 3 or 4 subjects on this list takes me back to conversations
that we had before (maybe several years ago?) when we were discussing
slots and links.  Maybe they were here maybe they were on the ARB list.
I do not recall now.  

But my feeling in both of these areas are that there is a tendency for
archetype developers to create archetypes that are more than one
clinical concept.  IIRC, that is about the time that templates were
being thought of/designed to alleviate the pressure on archetypes to
serve everyone, everywhere.  

As Heath has just mentioned, templates are the better place for this
type of grouping.  They tend to provide that ability to be more
localized.  Remember that when you are creating or reusing archetypes
that they should be universally reusable.  If they are not, then they do
not meet the basic requirement of being a single clinical concept.  This
is fundamental to openEHR being future proof.  

The misuse of slots and probably any use of links in a particular
archetype; IMHO is a very bad thing and will lead us down the road that
we see with data model centric systems as opposed to our information
model.

While I am not a clinician nor a lab tech I do ask those of you creating
archetypes to review the fundamental principles of archetypes and
templates.  Then think twice before publishing an artifact. 

SLots in archetypes

[Tim Cook]

On Fri, 2009-05-29 at 16:56 +0200, Pariya Kashfi wrote:
> Hi Ian,
> Thanks for your response.
> In my case, I intend to use some existing Archetypes in my own
> observation. Having one Cluster/section named Status and Signs, I want
> to put two existing archetypes named Observation: Laboratory Values
> and Observation:Physical Examination into that. Re-factoring existing
> archetypes, in this case, doesn't make sense since eliminates the
> benefits of reusing existing archetypes.

Hi Pariya,

It seems to me that you are exactly describing the use case for
templates.  Remember that the definition for an archetype is the maximal
information model for a 'single' clinical concept.  What you are
describing above are most certainly separate concepts.

The purposes and usage of slots is well defined in the archetype
principles document.

HTH,
Tim



-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Folders in Demographic Items

[Tim Cook]

On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 18:10 +0100, Thomas Beale wrote:
> Tim Cook wrote: 
> > Hi Bert,
> > 
> > On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 14:46 +0200, Bert Verhees wrote:
> >   
> > > > that would be what I would do; the current spec does not say how to do
> > > > this. I don't even know if it is useful in the demographic service ;-)
> > > >   
> > 
> > Well, Tom, I can see many times that VERSIONED components are important
> > in the demographics area.  For one, think environmental aspects...
> > 
> >   
> 
> well PARTYs are already versioned, 

True.  But PARTY's are not PLACES. :-)


> but I imagine you are thinking of recording more 'state' data to do
> with the computing system? We have actually documented this idea
> somewhere, have to look it up ;-)

Hmmm, I can't think of where.  If you find it then I won't just think it
was in my head. ;-)

--Tim






-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20090506/387f6a6d/attachment.asc>

Folders in Demographic Items

[Tim Cook]

Hi Bert,

On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 14:46 +0200, Bert Verhees wrote:
> > 
> > that would be what I would do; the current spec does not say how to do
> > this. I don't even know if it is useful in the demographic service ;-)
> 

Well, Tom, I can see many times that VERSIONED components are important
in the demographics area.  For one, think environmental aspects...


> It is just that it is mentioned in the specifications of the reference
> model, like I quoted, two emails ago.

Bert, I must point out that the demographics section (which has been
paid little attention too) **IS** a component of the reference model.

> So there is, (as I understand what you say), no extra location for a
> directory-structure arranged in the reference model. 
> I was afraid I was missing something, and was preparing for an
> intensively reading of several the documents again.

While the document may be short on examples here.  I think
implementation experience (as you note) shows that this is important.  

> I would know some places of useful directory-services, connected to
> OpenEHR. But indeed, that is outside the reference model.
> 

How so?   The demographics components are EXPLICITLY in the RM.


Cheers,
Tim




-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

[Fwd: [JIRA] Created: (SPEC-302) Translations embedded in the ADL are not efficient and should instead use 'gettext' catalogs.]

[Tim Cook]

On Sun, 2009-05-03 at 16:43 +0100, Thomas Beale wrote:

> I am not a priori for or against any particular solution, but I think
> we should remember that the source form of archetypes is not the
> format for which effciency matters; the operational template form is
> the important one. 

 see your point.  Since an author apparently cannot change the status of
their own entry in Jira.  I have asked the administrators to
close/delete this one as appropriate.

Thanks for the discussion.

--Tim




> 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

[Fwd: [JIRA] Created: (SPEC-302) Translations embedded in the ADL are not efficient and should instead use 'gettext' catalogs.]

[Tim Cook]

On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 23:27 +1000, Peter Gummer wrote:
> Now this wish to capture nuances that don't exist in the primary 
> language strikes me as perfectly reasonable, but it's certainly stepping 
> outside the bounds of translation. How do we handle this?

Local specializations (en-us) ;-) of parent archetypes.

--Tim





-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

[Fwd: [JIRA] Created: (SPEC-302) Translations embedded in the ADL are not efficient and should instead use 'gettext' catalogs.]

[Tim Cook]

On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 22:03 +1000, Thomas Beale wrote:
> It is clearly true that with a number of translations the archetype will grow
> bigger, and initially (some years ago) I thought separate files might be
> better as well. But I really wonder if it makes any difference in the end -
> since, in generating the 'operational' (aka 'flat') form of an archetype that
> is for end use, the languages required (which might still be more than one)
> can be retained, and the others filtered out. I don't think gettext would deal
> with this properly - the idea that an artefact can have more than one language
> active.

I can only refer you to the "bazillions" of applications that use
gettext. Browsers and GUI widgets everywhere are designed, expecting
gettext catalogs. Not using gettext means that every implementation has
to develop their own filtering mechanisms; in place of reuse of proven
existing technology.  OR; you could choose to develop an openEHR
filtering specification.  Then develop browser interfaces and widget
interfaces to match.  

> The other good thing about the current format (which will eventually migrate
> to pure dADL+cADL) is that it is a direct object serialisation, and can be
> deserialised straight into in-memory objects (Hash tables in the case of the
> translations).

H, sorry, I don't get the point here.  Seems to me you are saying
that you pull all translations into memory.  Instead of letting the
application decide which one it wants.

> Anyway, I think that we need to carefully look at the requirements on this
> one, before leaping to a solution...

Of course.  That is why I suggested targeting the 2.0 version.  There is
a good chance that there will be knock on effects (good or bad) to the
RM (AuthoredResource, et.al.) as well.


I'd like to go back to a very basic question I have.  What is the use of
having the original language as (a specific) part of the archetype if it
isn't meant to be the validation language?  Seems to me that it is "the"
expression of the original author for the  construction of the
archetype.  Translations are a convenience for everyone else. 

--Tim
   

-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

[Fwd: [JIRA] Created: (SPEC-302) Translations embedded in the ADL are not efficient and should instead use 'gettext' catalogs.]

[Tim Cook]

On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 16:28 +0930, Heath Frankel wrote:
> Hi Koray,
> 
>  I will let others respond about translations etc, but I did want to
> pick up on your point about multi-part file.  This was an option
> recently consider when we were looking at a mechanism to record an MD5
> Hash of the archetype.  There was a desire to provide this hash
> external to the ADL itself whilst making it available to the archetype
> consumer locally so it was not necessary to query some external notary
> service to do the integrity check.  Using a multi-part file would
> allow the usual PGP message and signature parts to be used.  It was
> thought to be quite a disruptive change, but if there are other
> reasons to do this...

The MD5 for an archetype is now available in the CKM.  IIRC, this was to
verify the validity of the actual ADL source aas having come from the
CKM.

But, since archetype exports are being generated as .zip files there is
no reason (that I can think of) why this couldn't be applied on the fly
if a user selects only a few languages (as Hugh suggested) or if a
bundle is created that includes the original language plus specific .po
translation files.  

As I said in my response to Hugh, this is certainly a long term issue
but I think it should be addressed sooner rather than later.  

Cheers,
Tim


-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

[Fwd: [JIRA] Created: (SPEC-302) Translations embedded in the ADL are not efficient and should instead use 'gettext' catalogs.]

[Tim Cook]

Hi Hugh,

On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 10:23 +1000, Hugh Leslie wrote:
> I agree Tim that this is an issue.  One of the possible ways forward
> is allowing a user to select which translations they want in the
> archetype before downloading it from the repository.  This would be
> something that would be relatively easy to do in CKM - this means you
> only get the languages that you need.

This would be a good option at this point.  As it was raised with me
from a potential user about get several languages that they would never
need and the potential impact on applications having to manage all
those.

But my real argument is that we should adopt industry standards in this
area as we have in other areas.  It is not only efficient but it makes
people feel more comfortable.  If the CKM has (can have) that export
capability.  I wonder how difficult it would be for you (?) to add
collaborative translation ability like Launchpad has?

See: https://translations.launchpad.net/oship/trunk/+pots/oship 
You can upload new templates as need and download .po (or already
compiled .mo) files that use all of the standard tools and application
framework mechanisms.   

As my CR is a major change I would like to ask the Jira admins to open
up a target ADL version 2.0.  There is already an ADL 2.0 draft
specification.  I envision that this is a long term project.  Especially
since ADL is now an ISO spec.  I would like to target this for 2.0 (not
even on the roadmap yet. 

Also, based on the openEHR mantra of
"implementation,implementation,implementation"... volunteer the OSHIP
project to experiment with not only using this approach but to build a
tool that can extract the languages and create the .po files. 

Thoughts?

--Tim

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

[Fwd: [JIRA] Created: (SPEC-302) Translations embedded in the ADL are not efficient and should instead use 'gettext' catalogs.]

[Tim Cook]

Hi All,

I raised the below CR and I wanted to open up discussion on this issue.
Actually I brought it up a few years ago but I don't have a record of
where/when; now.

I know that this have a major impact on implementers but I think the
current way we handle translations in ADL is a monster that is only
going to get worse.

Thoughts?

--Tim


 Forwarded Message 
From: Tim Cook (JIRA) 
To: timothywayne.cook at gmail.com
Subject: [JIRA] Created: (SPEC-302) Translations embedded in the ADL are
not efficient and should instead use 'gettext' catalogs.
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 21:47:02 +0100 (BST)

Translations embedded in the ADL are not efficient and should instead use 
'gettext' catalogs. 
--

 Key: SPEC-302
 URL: http://www.openehr.org/issues/browse/SPEC-302
 Project: Specification
  Issue Type: Change Request
    Reporter: Tim Cook


Archetypes like openEHR-EHR-OBSERVATION.blood_pressure.v1 with four 
translations are huge and tedious to process the languages. 
openEHR should adopt the standard use internationalization (i18n) and 
localization (i10n) tools that use gettext catalogs.  This is the industry 
standard approach to performing translations. Tools like POEdit are open source 
and cross platform http://www.poedit.net/ 

More info about gettext is here: 
http://www.gnu.org/software/gettext/manual/gettext.html though it is about the 
GNU set of tools there are others.  

What will openEHR-EHR-OBSERVATION.blood_pressure.v1 look like with 10, 15, 100 
translations?


-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20090428/d3b2cc9b/attachment.asc>

Archetype-triggered events for CDSS

[Tim Cook]

On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 09:30 +0200, Pariya Kashfi wrote:
> Hi Tim,
> Thank you for your explanation, may I know more specifically where in
> archetypes one can put FOL predicates? 

See section 3.2.1 of the AOM documentation.  Specifically the invariants
attribute.

Great documentation is a beautiful thing... and openEHR has it!





-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Layers of interoperability, OWL and openEHR

[Tim Cook]

On Wed, 2009-04-22 at 22:06 +0100, Seref Arikan wrote:
[off the topic, needs it own thread I suppose; but.]
> solution attempts to some of the problems we have. For example, as
> Tony Shannon has written a couple of times, there is ongoing work at
> CHIME (which should be revealed quite soon) for implementation of
> fundemental aspects of an openEHR based system, and I am very willing
> to consider HL7  V3 or 2.x as a message bus for connecting openEHR
> repositories to other systems. This will require a mapping mechanism,
> and I would be willing to employ OWL based opportunites here. This
> would be a controllable use case for tackling the issues which have
> been described by you also. In case you have other solid use cases you
> can share, I'd really like to hear about them. 

I'm wondering why you would reinvent something when a perfectly good
tool (open source) already exists for such things?  MIRTH is perfectly
capable of handling many challenging interface issues.
http://www.mirthproject.org  We are in the planning stages of
implementing an API for it in OSHIP http://launchpad.net/oship 

Cheers,
Tim




-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Archetype-triggered events for CDSS

[Tim Cook]

On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 12:59 +0200, Pariya Kashfi wrote:
> Hi all,
> In the paper "Archetype 101" by Heather and Sam, there's a short
> discussion about CDSS, here comes a quote from it:
> "Intelligent generic decision support programs can rely on
> archetype-triggered events and for the
> first time operate in real-time." 
> 
> 
> I wonder what is the exact meaning of Archetype-triggered events.
> IS any research done in this area before or has any implementation
> based on that been used in a CDSS so far?
> 

Archetypes allow for embedded First Order Predicate Logic therefore in
an application they can do some simple internal processing.

The Epidemiological Surveillance Support System (EpiS3)[1] has been
funded for development (for 3 years, by the INCT-Macc network in Brazil)
based on the Python implementation of openEHR; aka. OSHIP[2].

Though background work began last year, the funding is expected to be
released within the next few weeks and development in earnest can
finally begin. :-)  The OSHIP framework also includes event triggering
and we will be exploring several options using both of these triggering
mechanisms in conjunction forward-chaining inference and Bayesian DSS.

[1]  https://launchpad.net/epis3 
[2]  https://launchpad.net/oship/ 

Regards,
Tim

-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Why is the editor not opening ADL files?

[Tim Cook]

Caution; a bit of a rant ahead

On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 14:34 +, Thomas Beale wrote:

> it already can, regardless of demographics, because such clinically 
> relevant data as date of birth and sex are recorded in the EHR anyway - 
> you would not attempt to do a join across EHR and demographic services 
> to answer that query. Although, if you had a service more oriented to 
> demographics + admin events, you could potentially satisfy this query on 
> it; however, in general, clinical queries will refer to a mixture of 
> basic data like age, sex, maybe occupation (where relevant to health) 
> etc, as well as the 'hard' clinical data; they would normally be run on 
> an EHR containing this data.

Maybe I should ask a question first.  Are we building a model JUST for
personal healthcare; or for general healthcare?

I ask this because I get the impression from Thomas' statement (and the
overall all direction of archetypes.  That the mind set is that
healthcare information is ONLY personal.  

In fact healthcare involves us and everything around us.  Our living
spaces, our working spaces, the people that we come into contact with.
We cannot separate our health events from our environment (geographical
or social).  I thought that I was aware of this when I lived in the US,
Canada, Sweden and studied in the UK.  However, living and working in a
developing country for one year now has made me realize just how
industrialized and general practice oriented the archetypes are for
openEHR.  I sincerely believe that the RM is in good shape (okay we
(OSHIP) plan to bring on some bio-informaticians and that may change
things in the RM just a bit).  

While as an American I love the ability built into the openEHR model to
separate demographics from clinical; in the real (larger) world, in many
cases, that demographic information is CRUCIAL to healthcare systems to
see what is happening in a region.


I was the first one to complain (to Sergio) that Rigoleta's archetypes
didn't comply with the RM (I couldn't implement them).  I should have
been complaining to the ARB that we were not ISO 0 compliant

I am as remiss as everyone else in not filing CR's so that these changes
can go through the proper channels and be decided and changed.  openEHR
has a wonderfully organized change manangement system.  We should all
use it.

 Stay tuned for tomorrow's rant on why climate change
is evolutionary.  :-) 

Cheers,
Tim

now back to making the Python archetype builder actually build
archetype instances..

-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

openEHR @ Google Summer of Code 2009?

[Tim Cook]

On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 11:51 +0100, Erik Sundvall wrote:

> We have posted two LiU suggestions at
> http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/dev/GSoC2009 please add other
> projects!
> 
> Shinji and Rong listed projects last year, will you be interested this
> year? OSHIP? PatientOS? Zilics? NHS? OHT? Ocean? Others?

Here are my GSoC2009 project ideas that I will be submitting:
http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/GSoC2009_ideas.html 


--Tim
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

openEHR @ Google Summer of Code 2009?

[Tim Cook]

Thanks for posting this Erik.  I can tell you that I have already
started a GsoC application to add the GData and Google Health interface
to OSHIP.

But I believe that there can be multiple openEHR applications.  In fact
I really think that my application is focused more on GH even though it
does have the openEHR link to it.

I'll take a look later at the wiki page.


--Tim






On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 08:45 +0100, Erik Sundvall wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> Now the FAQ for Google Summer of Code 2009 has been published at
> http://code.google.com/opensource/gsoc/2009/faqs.html.
> >From the FAQ: "We'll begin accepting applications from open source
> mentoring organizations on Monday, March 9, 2009; we'll stop accepting
> organization applications on Friday, March 13th."
> 
> Maybe it's time for people involved in openEHR implementation projects
> etc. to discuss if/how their openEHR projects want to apply. 2008 we
> made a last-minute-attempt, hopefully this year we can be more
> prepared. I'd suggest using the wiki for coordination, I set up a page
> skeleton at http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/dev/GSoC2009
> 
> Best regards,
> Erik Sundvall
> erisu at imt.liu.sehttp://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/Tel: +46-13-227579
> ___
> openEHR-implementers mailing list
> openEHR-implementers at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-implementers
-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

"Future-proof" at risk! was: RM Versions

[Tim Cook]

Okay,

Maybe the subject line is a little melodramatic.  :-)

But we do have a situation and a good bit of this email (along with your
consultations) will be placed as a Problem Report (PR) on the
openEHR.org website.

My point of view is that we have a multi-level modeling environment and
therefore we have a multi-level problem solving environment.  It must
ALL work together.  Archetype designers and application developers.

I'll be a bit shallow in this email and will not look up specific
instances.  But there are place(s) within the RM where the RM version is
recorded.

The archetype tools should record this information in the archetype
saying that this version of THIS archetype was built against a specific
openEHR RM version. 

There are VERY specific guidelines as to what and what does not
constitute various archetype version changes.  Maybe/maybe not these
should be reviewed in reference to RM versions?

Since we all have very good crystal balls.
We can see a future where at RM version 2.5 there are significant
differences to RM version 1.0.2.

However; we have Mary in rural Montana USA, a patient a Dr. Jones's
office (believing strongly in future proof) and she moves to a new city;
let's say Atlanta, GA. Where Dr. Brown (ALSO! believing strongly in
future proof) has been on top of things and is now at RM version 2.5.

Well, Dr. Brown gets Mary's record from Dr. Jones and discovers  that
some of the archetypes that were built 15 years ago in 1.0.2 RM just
simply do not display or worse yet cause unknown type errors and his
application(s) crashes. 

Future Proof?  Hardly!

Doesn't seem much different from the migrating SQL data base schema
problem does it?


So I believe that we as a community should take multiple courses.  I
want to emphasize that we should take THEM ALL!

First: an archetype tool developer MUST record the RM that an archetype
was built against.

Let's say RM=['1.0.1']

(okay so I apologize for my Python syntax, but it's easy to read).

Second: An archetype is edited (whether it's version changes or not)
against a tool using RM 1.0.2.

The RM = is now RM=['1.0.1,'1.0.2]  

At some point this archetype has now been validated against 2 RM
versions.  It should work with both RM versions and the consumer
(application developer knows it).


Third:  The application developer has a choice to make.  Either read the
list and support backwards compatibility based on the last known RM
version or simply be NON-FUTURE-PROOF and reject the data.


At the very least, the archetype contains the information needed to let
the application know what it expects in order to be rendered and
processed.

So in essence, I TOTALLY disagree with Tom's statement:
   

> > I don't mind including the release number of 
> > openEHR when the archetype was first released, but I don't see how it 
> > can be useful information.
> > 
> > 

Sorry Tom; if it's put in a list, I can see EVERY reason why it is useful 
information.

The openEHR documentation is VERY VERY VERY good.  There is no reason that an 
implementer could possibly accommodate multiple RM versions.

Regards,
Tim

 
On Sun, 2009-02-08 at 11:03 +, Thomas Beale wrote:
> Sam Heard wrote:
> > Hi All
> >
> > I would suggest that we have a very strong backwardly compatible notion on
> > each reference model and do not do anything that would invalidate current
> > archetypes in RM 1.x
> >
> > This would mean that we only had to record the highest level version that an
> > archetype was compatible with in the archetype RM 1.0 and leave it at that.
> >
> > I am sure people working in the environment would like such an approach.
> >
> > It means we have two rules:
> > All archetypes of the same version are compatible semantically
> > All archetypes work with the reference model version (1,2 etc) and go on
> > being compatible.
> >
> > Cheers, Sam
> >   
> *I still have not see a solution to the basic problem that if we record 
> a compatibility release(s) _inside_ the archetype, then whenever a new 
> release of openEHR comes out, thousands of archetypes would be updated 
> to reflect the new release number. If this is not done, then those 
> archetypes will over time look as if they stopped being compatible with 
> later releases of openEHR. Making the modification means that every 
> archetype in every local repository would have to be modified this way, 
> as well as in central places like CKM. And it means that we are now 
> re-issuing archetypes when no update is needed to the content. I can't 
> see how this can work. I don't mind including the release number of 
> openEHR when the archetype was first released, but I don't see how it 
> can be useful information.
> 
> - thomas beale
> 
> 
> *
> 
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services

RM Versions

[Tim Cook]

On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 16:18 +, Ian McNicoll wrote:
> Hi Thomas, I was suggesting the RM version be recorded when the
> archetype is officially published or revisioned and re-published. This
> is the only time when an archetype author can be expected to take some
> account of the underlying RM when designing or revising the model. It
> is not a perfect solution but it gives some estimation of the RM
> version that the author was working against when designing the
> archetype. The archetype tools could automatically record the RM
> version whenever an archetype lifecyle transitions to published or has
> its version/revision updated.

Exactly.  Each time the archetype is touched the tools can look to see
if the current RM is in the list.  The tool should probably know how to
invalidate previously valid versions as well.

--Tim
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

RM Versions

[Tim Cook]

On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 17:28 +0100, Bert Verhees wrote:

> > actually, I would only agree at the level of major version - there are 
> > archetypes around that started life when Release 1.0.1 was the latest, 
> > and may not be finished until Release 1.0.2 is already issued. It most 
> > likely makes no difference to the authors.
> >   
> Exactly what I mean, we must agree, which part of the version-number
> indicates a possible incompatibility concernig archetypes/RM-version.
> Bert

Don't try to get too complicated.  Just have a list that states that
this archetype has been validated against these RM versions. If my RM
version is in the list I okay.  There aren't going to be too many RM
versions anyway.

--Tim


-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

RM Versions

[Tim Cook]

On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 13:29 +, Thomas Beale wrote:
> I meant to add: however, we should still raise a PR in openEHR Jira to 
> describe the problem of knowing the compatibility of archetypes with 
> respect to a given reference model. Tim - do you want to do this?

Yes.  I'll do this in the coming days.   I am thinking that it would be
a List attribute like:

rm_versions=['1.0.1','1.0.2']

That way the software can simply say is; my_rm_version in rm_versions.

The question is who validates the archetypes against each rm_version;
the original author?

--Tim



-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Wisdom of the Crowds

[Tim Cook]

Hi All,

[This posting is related to Tony Shannon's great email regarding the
future of openEHR in 2009.  I think some of it relates to the technical
list members as well so I have CC'd them.]

Not wanting to hi-jack Tony's thread I started this one where I hope I
have a few positive and possibly helpful suggestions.  Some of them may
need funding to help protect some people's time and others are virtually
cost free.

I do have one negative comment and I'll get that out of the way first.
As I have indicated, I believe that I will have more success working on
some of the fringe areas of healthcare with openEHR.  Therefore I tend
to talk to providers that are not in the main; primary care/family
medicine/general practice areas.  I have been told by more than one of
these folks that they didn't feel very welcome to participate on this
(Clinical) list on issues that concerned their areas.  Whether it was
lack of feedback on questions or actual comments about currently
focusing on archetypes for more general medicine. A bit more
consciousness about welcoming new people might be in order.  :-)   

Now for a few positive suggestions for the group and for individuals.
Some of you may already be doing some of these things but in my
experience in building open source teams they have helped me.

1. There are more than 450 members registered on this (Clinical) list.
With a few more than that on the technical list.  Many are duplicates
(like myself).  I would guess that at least 75% of the Clinical list
members have downloaded and tinkered with one of the archetype editors.
Probably created a few and then said; Now what?

No software to use them on (hopefully OSHIP will soon help with that) no
place for peer review and feedback.  I suggest a section on the SVN
server labeled 'community' with the correct folder structure underneath
like the other areas.  A group of the experts should receive an email
each time a commit is made to this section.  One of the experts then
provides some kind of feed back on that commit.  Maybe some of them are
good enough to be moved into the CKM for consideration?  Maybe the
experts can provide enough feedback that these early community
committers get better.  It is clearly true that Sam, Heather, the NHS
group and a handful of others cannot possibly build all the archetypes
needed.  Sure, you'll get a lot of junk archetypes to sort through in
the beginning. You'll also need to spend more time in education but
there are a lot of resources on the website and wiki that you can point
to.  But people like to participate in something meaningful.  If they
enjoy it, they'll tell a friend.  It shouldn't be too difficult to setup
a web page to show people when to get an SVN client along with a name
and email registration space where they can be sent a SVN password
automatically.  Open this are up to the world.  If it gets completely
out of control then change the rules or shut it down.  Right now there
is no way to encourage "the crowd" to participate and share their
wisdom.

2.  When you go to meetings and conferences.  Do not hang out with
openEHR people.  Meet new professionals and have a 15-30 sec comment
about how we are turning over the data design of healthcare applications
to the healthcare providers.  Give them the URLs to get an editor and to
the community SVN website along with the mailing list info.  Do not try
to explain openEHR or even archetypes to them at that point.  Even if
they ask; give them a little more info and encourage them to join the
community.  Leave them wanting to learn more.

3.  Post comments on blog articles and healthcare related sites/online
magazines.  Try one of these:http://www.hitsphere.com/ 

4. Prepare a guest blog entry.  In fact two of those on the above site
have asked me and are waiting for me to prepare guest postings on
openEHR for their sites.  Most of these guys WELCOME contributed content
that is of interest to their readers.

5.  When you see stuff that is blatantly bull$$%$%^ on blogs and online
magazines, do not hesitate to say so.  If you really believe in what you
are saying and doing then let people know.  Certainly people like David
Kibbe have no problem with saying that CCR is the greatest thing to
happen to healthcare while at the same time thinking that openEHR is an
open source EMR project. Don't be afraid to put your ideas and
convictions out there.  It usually only takes a few minutes.  If we
spend all of our time discussing openEHR related matters on these lists
then we are only "preaching to the choir" and not recruiting new people
with new ideas.  


Well, that's my top five.  I hope they help promote and expand the
community. 

Cheers,
Tim

-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from t

RM Versions

[Tim Cook]

This is really an implementer's question but I'd like opinions from
everyone on it.

ADL files carry the adl version as well as the reference model name that
the archetype was built against.  

With the ARB starting on release 1.1 and it looks like there may be
changes that impact software.  I wonder if we should raise a CR for 1.1
that adds the RM version number to the ADL as well?  

While I know that the ARB will do everything possible to not break
backwards compatibillity.  It could be useful for the software to be
able to tell which RM version an archetype was built against. 

Cheers,
Tim

-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: oe_trick.png
Type: image/png
Size: 7092 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Detailed Clinical Modelling for EHR Development and deployment and for HL7 v3

[Tim Cook]

On Fri, 2008-11-07 at 21:57 -0500, Williamtfgoossen at cs.com wrote:

> I would like to attach a recent paper on it, but it usually gets
> stripped of when submitting to the list. 

This would be interesting.  You can always upload it to the wiki.

http://www.openehr.org/wiki/dashboard.action


--Tim
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Please respond by Nov. 5th: Known Free/Open Source EHR/EMR Deployment Count.

[Tim Cook]

Hi Ignacio,

On Wed, 2008-11-05 at 10:16 -0600, Ignacio Valdes wrote:
> I will re-phrase. Can anyone tell me how many actual patients does
> anyone have in any system that conforms to the OpenEHR specification
> that is FOSS licensed?
> 
> -- IV

Re-phasing isn't necessary.  I think that everyone understood your
question.  The problem is that your metric is nonsensical.

As a US veteran I have no choice in which EMR my records are stored.
Nor does the physician have a choice in which application they use.  So
you can measure the number of patient records in VistA.  But really is
that any measure of it's validity?  No it isn't.  It is mandated by the
organization not via some engineering principles but by simple
availability.

While I understand that you haven't had time to study the openEHR specs.
I do believe that it is incumbent upon you as the leader of the AMIA
OSWG to do so or appoint students/academics to do so.  

Even some FOSS application developers have called for a common data
model.  What they do not yet realize is that what they really want in a
common information model.  openEHR represents this requirement.  But
when they look at it they want something simpler.  However, as Albert
Einstein said; Keep everything as simple as possible, but no simpler.

Healthcare information is complex.  Therefore the (openEHR) information
model is necessarily complex to some extent.  You will either study and
embrace it or you will be a victim of the constantly evolving "data
model" of other systems that are never inter-operable.  


Cheers,
Tim







 




-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Please respond by Nov. 5th: Known Free/Open Source EHR/EMR Deployment Count.

[Tim Cook]

On Wed, 2008-11-05 at 07:33 -0600, Ignacio Valdes wrote:
> My original call was for how many actual patients does anyone have
> entered into any OpenEHR system for inclusion into the paper which
> will be voted on November 9th-11th.  I need these today but I will
> take them if I can get them tomorrow. Does anyone have those numbers?
> 
> -- IV


Well, that's kind of (though not exactly) like asking how many actual
patients are entered into an HL7 system.   It is non-sensical to ask
such a question. 

OpenMRS probably has more patients entered than any other FOSS
application.  However that doesn't mean that it is THE application to be
used by everyone/everywhere.  

MY point was that the paper should be rejected because it doesn't
address the underlying issue.  That underlying issue is that for FOSS
healthcare applications, to be successful in the traditional FOSS sense,
must be based on truly open, available and well engineered
specifications.  Not unlike how Ethernet trumped Token Ring.  It was
open and available for everyone.  From the hardware layer to the top,
the Internet exists today because of open and available specifications.
Once healthcare wakes up to this idea we can count on real progress as
well.


Cheers,
Tim

 
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Please respond by Nov. 5th: Known Free/Open Source EHR/EMR Deployment Count.

[Tim Cook]

On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 16:43 -0600, Ignacio Valdes wrote:

> Um, Thomas Beale is a past LMN Freedom Award Winner.  It isn't a
> question of not supporting OpenEHR. I have not taken the time to fully
> understand it. As far as I can tell VistA has far more installations
> and patient records than any other system that I can find. Isn't that
> a de-facto standard?

Well, this is quite telling in itself.  openEHR is NOT an application.
It is a set of well engineered specifications.

--Tim






-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Please respond by Nov. 5th: Known Free/Open Source EHR/EMR Deployment Count.

[Tim Cook]

hi Bert,

On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 09:03 +0100, Bert Verhees wrote:
> >   
> Closed source doesn't solve the interoperability-problem either, at
> least it didn't last twenty years, but it is used a lot.
> So your answer does not seem right to me.

Well, I'm not sure how my answer doesn't seem right.  Maybe it is the
things that I assumed and left out, given the audience?  Of course the
closed source model hasn't provided the solution.  But neither has the
open source community.  


If you look at open source successes you will see that they are a result
of open specifications/standards.  


Let's take Ethernet for example.  Without a doubt, IBM's Token Ring
technology was HUGELY superior.  It was a difficult decision for me in
the 1980s.  I was lucky and went with the open standard of Ethernet.  It
catapulted my career at that point.


Since then, other open standards have proven to be very successful. They
have basically CREATED the Internet.


> 
> The license model has nothing to do with interoperablity.
> 
> (sorry, open door, couldn't resist)


No apologies required.  In fact, you made my point.  It isn't about the
software license as much as it is about the specifications.  If we do
not join together in a standard information model then we (FOSS
community) will only be more of the same.


MAYBE!!! AMIA & HIMSS will get a clue?

Cheers,
Tim




-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Please respond by Nov. 5th: Known Free/Open Source EHR/EMR Deployment Count.

[Tim Cook]

Hi Ignacio,

Thanks for your reply.

On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 07:25 -0600, Ignacio Valdes wrote:
> 3.5 million patients in FOSS systems in the US private sector so far
> with only about 1/3 of those asked giving answers. 

Hmmm, I'm not sure what you mean by this. 


> The vote was for
> obtaining a voting quorum, not the actual vote. The actual vote will
> be done at the os-wg business meeting and by private email.

Well, you probably should explain this better if you present it to the
public.


>  While I
> have invited public input such as yours, the vote is only open to AMIA
> os-wg members. 

See above.  Of course I still have a rant about AMIA.  When I founded
the OSWG I wanted at the very least the mailing list to be open to the
public.  That would have opened up AMIA to a broader community.
However, the leadership there seems to remain isolated in their actions
and thinking. I still have hope that you and others will be able to
change that eventually.

 

> With regard to OpenEHR 13606, how would you like it to
> appear in the paper? -- IV

Well, IMHO, openEHR is a better engineered version of 13606.  While I
have a deep respect for you personally, I see it as very telling about
the mindset in the US about real information models in healthcare.  This
mindset is certainly one of the reasons why I no longer reside/work in
the US.  


As far as the way I would like to see them appear appear in the paper is
FAR beyond the capability of an email.

BTW: I found your comment in the paper about VistA being a "de-facto
standard" to be quite disconcerting.  Where is this model published?
Where are their engineering specs?  Being a software engineer yourself,
I continue to wonder how you support this model and yet do not embrace
and support openEHR?

Cheers,
Tim



-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Please respond by Nov. 5th: Known Free/Open Source EHR/EMR Deployment Count.

[Tim Cook]

BTW:  I was going to vote No.  But when I clicked on the "vote" button
it registered it as a vote for the paper.  Kind of a screwy voting
system I think.



On Mon, 2008-11-03 at 14:35 -0600, Ignacio Valdes wrote:
> The un-official, Draft 7 of the upcoming American Medical Informatics
> Association Open Source Working Group white paper to be voted on
> November 9th can be found http://ignaciovaldes.com/amia. It will be
> voted on for ratification on November 9th-11th or so. Action is needed
> on your part to answer the question: If open source is so great why is
> no one using it? There is no aggregate data that I can find to counter
> this opinion. If you know of a Free/Open Source EHR/EMR deployment and
> could please send three pieces of information on each deployment that
> you have by Wednesday November 5th: General Location, software version
> and most importantly NUMBER OF PATIENTS IN SYSTEM. This paper could
> have national impact with this data. Please respond by email to
> ivaldes at hal-pc.org if you are able to obtain this data.
> 
> -- IV
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Please respond by Nov. 5th: Known Free/Open Source EHR/EMR Deployment Count.

[Tim Cook]

On Mon, 2008-11-03 at 14:35 -0600, Ignacio Valdes wrote:
>  Action is needed
> on your part to answer the question: If open source is so great why is
> no one using it? 

There is a very simple answer.  The current crop of offerings doesn't
solve the problem of interoperability.

I note with interest that your paper has a (very short) section on
standards.  Yet openEHR not 13606 do not appear ANYWHERE in the
document.  Yet you posted on two openEHR mailing lists for comments.

Until the fundamental problem of interoperability is addressed you can
rant, rave and write about open source in healthcare but it is simply
more of the same.  When organizations like AMIA, and HIMSS look at and
promote the fundamental concepts of a viable information model, they
will make progress. 

Until then, the US healthcare industry will continue to suffer from
their "not invented here" attitude.  

Cheers,
Tim



-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

AQL-parser in Java? + AQL response format (using the AS operator)

[Tim Cook]

Hi Eric,

I suggest that you read the Extract Information Model document.
Though it still needs some vetting, this should answer many of your
questions.

Regards,
Tim




On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 11:04 +0200, Erik Sundvall wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> 1. Has anybody planned, or started, to create an AQL-parser in Java?
> 
> Maybe the basics from AQL to parse tree could be common for several
> different persistence implementations and then the rest of the
> implementation will be different for different persistence mechanisms.
> 
> Our first interest will be in transforming AQL queries to queries
> against an XML-database containing versioned Compositions. (It's for
> an educational system where performance isn't crucial.)
> 
> 2. Are there any suggestions for standardised response formats? It
> would be interesting if we could query each others' implementations
> (Python and various Java based ones) and interpret the response :-)
> 
> When returning entire openEHR subtrees (an entire Composition or Entry
> for example) I guess the current XML-format could be used to start
> with. The response is likely to often be a list of such subtrees and
> the format of that list Would need to be standardised.
> 
> Another case is when using the AS operator, how do we in a
> standardised way identify the named parts.
> 
> Best regards,
> Erik Sundvall
> erisu at imt.liu.sehttp://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/Tel: +46-13-227579
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**

Demographics Archetypes

[Tim Cook]

There are some here:
http://www.openehr.org/svn/knowledge/archetypes/dev/adl/openehr/demographic/ 

but at least some of them do not conform to the openEHR RM.

--Tim




On Fri, 2008-09-19 at 11:46 -0700, Eddy Rospide wrote:
> All,
>  
> When I try to pull the demographics archetype from the following link
> on the OpenEHR website, I get a 404 error. Can someone test to see if
> they get the same error?
>  
> http://www.openehr.org/svn/knowledge/archetypes/dev/adl/openehr/demographic/openehr-demographic-person.person.draft.html
>  
> Thanks,
>  
> Eddy Rospide
> 
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

How to start an application with openEHR

[Tim Cook]

This is exactly the issue that the Python implementation intends to
address.  http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/dev/Python+developer%27s
+page 

The openEHR information model comes wrapped by a robust open source
application server.  There is still work to be done but MUCH is already
done.  

If you have an interest in using openEHR in a Python environment joins
us http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ref_impl_python to see
where you can help.  We need poeple at all levels of open source project
development.

Cheers,
Tim
 

On Fri, 2008-09-12 at 07:40 -0700, Mathias Lin wrote:
> Hi Sam and all,
> 
> I would like to add some newbie questions and also give some feedback on the
> openEHR website and information I found so far - really as an absolute
> newbie.
> My background:  I'm a software engineer living and working in China now for
> almost 3 years, using a lot of open source software and components; I don't
> have a medical background.
> 
> A while ago I was searching the web for open source EHR systems, which have
> a solid basis, not hacked, a good (preferably 'scientific') backing and
> supportive community. Beside OpenEHR I also came across two other systems
> (openMRS, Tolven), of which I also looked at openMRS closer. 
> 
> I read about the architecture, checked out both openMRS and openEHR projects
> from SVN, and I built both projects (java implementation) successfully. Also
> installed at the Ocean archetype tools.
> 
> Now for an absolute newbie I'd like to say: after reading (some of) the
> openEHR documents, it got clear to me what openEHR is about and how it can
> be used. But before I read them, just trying to gather the most important
> information from the website (by evaluating a suitable system), it didn't
> get clear to me at a first glance that openEHR is actually not a ready-to-go
> EHR system, but more a specification. Of course after a while I got to know
> it, but I was still wondering and in search of some kind of reference
> implementation for a whole system.
> Let's say, like after I've built the openMRS project, I could login to
> something, see and feel a real application. I was in search of something
> similar among the openEHR subprojects. Just a small sample application, not
> expecting a fully featured EHR system.
> 
> Now -- I understand the purpose of openEHR specification, and I know that
> it's 'just' a specification and it shouldn't be fixed to any concrete
> implementation, but I am wondering, since I assume that somebody in the
> community is actually using openEHR in real-life-applications, it seems 
> there's no such thing like the famous 'pet store' reference implementation
> that Sun is using to demonstrate their JEE specification. For example I am
> wondering about best-practice persistence management for
> templates/archetypes. 
> Of course, EHR systems and their requirements differ and developers favour
> different technologies, some use rich clients, some use web clients (maybe
> some systems don't even have a client and just serve as middleware), some
> use a SOA approach, some use relational db, some use pure XML dbs, some
> hibernate/ejb, and so on and so on
> 
> To sum it up, I am wondering (or it seems to me) that there is hardly any
> discussion about real system implementation regarding such things like
> persistence in the mailing list, or somebody who has actually built a real
> app, that could be used by newbies to start from. For example, I think most
> (client-based) EHR systems will have core features like user management,
> basic demographics management. It would be helpful to learn how such things
> like demographics are actually implemented in a real system (just as an
> example, of course the ways to implement are endless). Or how a GUI is built
> (how it can be generated from templates/archetypes?). A lot of questions I
> assume lot of people in the community already dealt with in their real-life
> implementations).
> 
> I learned that Greg Caulton has implemented some openEHR support  into his
> patientOS solution. I am wondering, are there any other open source 'real
> app' projects, that are built upon the openEHR specification from ground up,
> or is there such 'Sun's pet-store' sub project planned? Will the java
> implementation project extend any further, or will have a subproject?
> 
> You see, as a newbie I have some best-practice questions, but I didn't want
> to bother the mailing list with it. I can imagine, lot of newbies - also
> like Juan - have similar questions. So I just wanted to add my feedback to
> this thread as well, maybe it's helpful. 
> 
> Mathias
> 
> 
> -- 
> View this message in context: 
> http://www.nabble.com/How-to-start-an-application-with-openEHR-tp18247023p19457289.html
> Sent from the openehr-technical mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> 
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/m

Python/openEHR workshop, XVIII IEA World Congress of Epidemiology, Porto Alegre, Brazil

[Tim Cook]

Hi All,

This is really an announcement but I was invited to send it to this list
in case there are interested parties reading these emails and not the
announce list.



There will be a 1.5 day workshop on openEHR using the Python
implementation (aka. OSHIP) at the XVIII IEA World Congress of
Epidemiology in Porto Alegre,Brazil
http://www.epi2008.com.br/ingles/index.php on 20 & 21 September, 2008.

The workshop registration link is
at:http://www.epi2008.com.br/cursos/index.php#16


There are currently 7,000 registrants and there were over 5,000
abstracts submitted.  I (and my Brazilian co-presenter) are therefore
quite honored to be selected for this workshop.


Cheers,
Tim




-- 
**
Timothy W. Cook, MSc Health Informatics
Visiting Researcher, Clinical Decision Support Systems
Fluminense Federal University, Niter?i,RJ Brazil

Honorary Research Assistant, CHIME, University College London, 
London, England, UK
**

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Regex in Archetypes must include TYPE

[Tim Cook]

On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 10:59 +0100, Adam Flinton wrote:

> I repeat...:
> 
> If you want to use a regex then use a regex which is useable as a regex. 
> At present it is not & for no good reason.
> 
> i.e. saying "take the pseudo-regex & append xyz to it to create the real 
> regex" is both error prone & means that you can't actually use the regex 
> as a regex.

+1 

--Tim


-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Is there an OpenEHR technical commitee?

[Tim Cook]

Hi Adam,

On Wed, 2008-07-16 at 13:31 +0100, Adam Flinton wrote:
> Dear All,
> 
> I have raised 2 changes wrt archetypes (wrt regex'es and superclass 
> content in subclasses) & a thought occurred which had been troubling me 
> for a while which is:
> 
> Where exactly are these changes made/agreed to etc?

> 
> i.e. wrt say HL7 (or other std orgs I have been involved with (e.g. the 
> W3C) there are technical committees where I would put these changes, 
> possibly there would be a trac/bugzilla so that things don't "slip off 
> the radar", votes would be taken & recorded etc.
> 

The changes to the RM,AM, etc are handled by the Architecture Review
Board (ARB).  

There is a formal change process documented here:
http://www.openehr.org/specifications/specs_governance.html 

and here:

http://www.openehr.org/svn/specification/TRUNK/publishing/CM/CM_plan.pdf

and you can enter your problem Report/Change Request here: 
http://www.openehr.org/issues/browse/SPEC?report=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.project:changelog-panel


> I have been looking at the java archetype code & have been considering 
> putting some time in there but.how would I know that the code is up 
> to a given standard (e.g. say if the regex requirement was changed or 
> the super/subclass thing was resolved) given I can find no such committee?
> 

You should ask this question on the Java project mailing list:
http://www.openehr.org/projects/java.html I'm not sure what their bug
management process is but the Python project uses Launchpad:
https://launchpad.net/oship/ 

> This can only be the case if the changes/standards etc are out in the 
> open such that coders can have sufficient pre-warning of impending 
> changes (or indeed possibly wholly new structures) in advance so that 
> different tooling in different languages by different groups be the 
> coordinated.

This is certainly the case as you'll see from the above links.

> 
> i.e. if I were to generate XML from ADL using the ocean tools will I get 
> the same result as if I were to wrap the java tools as ant tasks & use 
> them for the same purpose? How would I know?

A question that others can answer as well. ;-)

HTH,
Tim


-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Reusable Archetypes

[Tim Cook]

Hi P?ria,

On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 14:18 +0200, P?ria Kashfi wrote:
> Hi there, 
> I feel the most important thing in developing suitable templates is to
> understand the openEHR reference model and its basic concepts very
> well and to be able to analyze the case and extract required
> information that may help finding proper archetype clues while
> designing. It may sounds simple at first glance but is a tedious
> task. 

I do not think that it is a requirement for knowledge workers to have a
deep understanding of the reference model.  

I believe (I hope) that one of the tenets of openEHR is to separate the
clinical element design (knowledge work) from the implementations
(software).  

> It seems to me that one should be aware of all existing Archetypes
> and their ingredients ( data section at least) to be able to
> recognizing Archetypes that may be used for the case, as bases for
> Template. Otherwise, How one can realize how to divide or organize
> concepts correctly and inline with the Ref. Model?

The AM/RM design should make this transparent to the knowledge worker.

> During my studies, I have faced many cases of need for changing forms
> and questionaries in the Clinic we cooperate with. 
> Seems that we should force all of our coworkers in Hospitals and Clinics, 
> etc. to 
> learn these concepts in depth and be continuously updated by info about 
> everyday created Archetypes all over the world

I prefer 'encourage' over 'force' but I understand your point.  :-)

Cheers,
Tim



-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Displayemail.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 4274 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Redux: Circular Imports

[Tim Cook]

On Fri, 2008-07-04 Peter Gummer wrote:

> Now I need to be clear about something ;-)
> 
> I'm 99% certain, Thomas, that Tim is talking about circular
> references in 
> the class model, not in the instance graph.

True.


> Apparently it gives the Python interpreter an apoplexy when it
> tries to resolve references that it has discovered yet. But as
> I mentioned in my earlier email, a bit of googling suggests
> that Python does have ways of working around this.
> 
> Let's see what Tim thinks.
> 


Let's see if I can add some context and explain my complaint a bit
better.  

An Archetype instance is a container and it has 6 items in it.  Some are
required, some optional. Some of those are containers as well. You can
visualize this by thinking of a directory tree:

Archetype
  adl_version
  archetype-id
  uid
  concept
  parent_archetype_id
  definition
  ontology
  invariants
  revision_history (inherited)

Sticking with the ontology issue:

Archetype
  adl_version
  archetype-id
  uid
  concept
  parent_archetype_id
  definition
  ontology
terminologies_available
specialisation_depth
term_codes
constraint_codes
term_attribute_names
parent_archetype_id
  invariants
  revision_history (inherited)


The issue here is the REQUIRED attribute parent_archetype_id. The
description is; Archetype which owns this ontology. Intuitively (to me
anyway) this would indicate that I would assign the OID of the parent
Archetype to this attribute.  However, the specifications call for the
attribute to be of the type 'Archetype' and it can't be just any
archetype, it is supposed to be the Archetype containing this ontology.
so I would have a repeating tree like this:

Archetype
  adl_version
  archetype-id
  uid
  concept
  parent_archetype_id
  definition
  ontology
terminologies_available
specialisation_depth
term_codes
constraint_codes
term_attribute_names
parent_archetype_id
  Archetype
  adl_version
  archetype-id
  uid
  concept
  parent_archetype_id
  definition
  ontology
terminologies_available
specialisation_depth
term_codes
constraint_codes
term_attribute_names
parent_archetype_id
  ... (repeat infinitely)  
  invariants
  revision_history (inherited)
  invariants
  revision_history (inherited)

  

So my suggestion is that ARCHETYPE.ontology.parent_archetype_id be of a
'type' that represents the OID of the parent and NOT the parent itself.


Cheers,
Tim




-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Displayemail.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 4274 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Redux: Circular Imports

[Tim Cook]

On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 10:03 +1000, Peter Gummer wrote:
> Hi Tim,
> 
> Tim, you're reminding me of the old days when I programmed in Delphi, 

Ahhh yes.  The good old days of Clipper.  :-)


> In Python's case, I imagine that the root cause of the problem would be that 
> it's an interpreted language. Is this why circular imports cause trouble in 
> Python?


Well, first of all Python doesn't have the concept of Interfaces in the
language.  This is added by another library that abuses the 'class'
statement to create them.  More on this issue in followup emails.

> 
> Can you fix the problem by putting the two interfaces in the same module?
> 

Nope.  In fact I started with this approach and it was MUCH worse.


> 
> Does one of these work for you?
> 

Nope.  They aren't the same problem.

> - Peter
> 
> P.S. Your posts to the mailing lists are always interesting, Tim, but those 
> of us using Microsoft Outlook (and its successor Windows Live Mail) have to 
> go to considerable effort to read them, because the messages appear empty 
> with the content as an attachment. I realise that this is because of a 
> defect in those applications, but you are one of only two people in all the 
> various lists that I subscribe to who send emails in this form, so I'm 
> certainly not going to all the trouble of moving to a new email client. I 
> know of one person who simply deletes your posts because of this issue. (For 
> the benefit of people using these email clients, I've manually pasted your 
> message in full below.)


Thanks for this reminder Peter.  The problem is manifested in the way
that Outlook Express and it's successor(s) handle MIME types.  I
digitally sign all of my outgoing email.  I think it is the right thing
to do and if the world ever catches on then we could eliminate SPAM with
simple filters that dump all unsigned/unauthenticated email.  However, I
realize that I am in a 1% minority and I try to remember to subvert this
issue by creating an attachment to my emails.  This (somehow) causes
those email clients to correctly display the text (see my attached
graphic). I often forget to attach something and without it, that causes
certain clients to display my text as an attachment. 

I have also had several corporate email systems reject my emails because
of the signature.  They seem to think it's a virus.  Go figure; a more
'certain' email is rejected due to sociological and technological
ignorance.   I remain steadfast though and will hopefully remember to
add the attachment so people don't have to reach for the delete
button.  

Though I am sure many people go into the ignore mode upon receiving
email from me. :-)

Cheers,
Tim




-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Displayemail.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 4274 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

Redux: Circular Imports

[Tim Cook]

On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 17:14 -0300, Tim Cook wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 16:50 -0300, Tim Cook wrote:
> 
> > My solution for Archetype.parentArchetype is to make it an ArchetypeId
> > type.
> 
> Sorry, this should have said make it an ObjectRef type that points to the 
> parent Archetype.

Just one more note here for my personal pet peeve in this area.

If you do not break up your archetyped data in some non-hierarchical
persistence layer then you don't need this attribute anyway.  :-)

--Tim


-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20080703/b14288bd/attachment.asc>

Redux: Circular Imports

[Tim Cook]

On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 16:50 -0300, Tim Cook wrote:

> My solution for Archetype.parentArchetype is to make it an ArchetypeId
> type.

Sorry, this should have said make it an ObjectRef type that points to the 
parent Archetype.


 
-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20080703/7fa01676/attachment.asc>

Redux: Circular Imports

[Tim Cook]

Hi All,

This is different than the issues brought up by Rong in the Java
implementation.

I brought this up before when reading the specs. But now as my code has
matured my fears are confirmed.  

Using Python:

In an interface I define attributes of a class. In addition to some
meta-data I define the 'type' of that attribute.  

Code is here; 
http://www.openehr.org/wsvn/ref_impl_python/TRUNK/oship/src/oship/openehr/am/archetype/?rev=0&sc=0

For example in IArchetype (the Archetype interface) I define ontology as
an ArchetypeOntology type.  Now Archetype of course is supposed to
implement IArchetype.  IArchetypeOntology defines parentArchetype as an
Archetype type. This creates a circular dependency when the interfaces
try to create a datatype based on a class that depends on itself.

The same thing happens with DvMultimedia.thumbnail being of the
DvMultimedia type.

Other languages may handle these issues differently but I'll be
surprised if the same issue isn't raised in the Ruby implementation???

I have tried various delayed import approaches but they do not solve
this problem.  

My solution for Archetype.parentArchetype is to make it an ArchetypeId
type.

My solution for DvMultimedia.thumbnail is to create a Thumnbnail class
that mirrors DvMultimedia without the thumnbnail attribute.

All thoughts, comments, suggestions are welcome.

Cheers,
Tim

 

-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

GUI-hints in openEHR templates? (Was: PatientOS archetype to form demo (of sorts))

[Tim Cook]

On Fri, 2008-06-27 at 14:42 +0200, Thilo Schuler wrote:
> Very interesting - maybe we could have seperate namespaces for the
> core tags and extensions. Could be a good compromise! While I see the
> advantages of keeping GUI stuff out of the template, I also see that
> this more and more complicated as we add additional abstraction
> layers.

Ahhh, true. It is complicated.  It is the reason why health informatics
is where it is today.  The beauty of the openEHR specs is that each
portion does one thing well and yet all the parts fit together.  

If we get carried away and start mixing the layers then the specs get
more complex, the tools more difficult to use, applications less likely
to inter-operate and there won't be very many implementations. 


If you aren't careful you could end up with something HL7v3. 


As "my buddy" Albert E. said; Make everything as simple as possible but
no simpler.  ;-)


--Tim
 




-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

GUI-hints in openEHR templates? (Was: PatientOS archetype to form demo (of sorts))

[Tim Cook]

On Fri, 2008-06-27 at 12:30 +0200, Thilo Schuler wrote:

> I can understand Josinas comments about clinicians not caring about
> the difference between semantics and GUI stuff, so a tool like the
> Template Designer should hide this important separation, where
> appropriate.


Not withstanding your 'where appropriate' caveat. The clinicians
creating templates (as with archetypes) need to have training and a
special understanding of what is at stake.  

If the clinicians designing archetypes/templates do not care about the
difference between semantics and GUI stuff then they are they wrong
clinicians to be designing archetypes and templates. 


They should probably be designing another "By Physicians for Physicians
EMR".  Do we really need another one of those?  We also do not need
another EHR built by clueless IT people.


That's not meant to disparage the clinicians on the various openEHR
mailing lists.  This is a multidisciplinary issue and it takes all of us
to do this the right way.  Again, the 'right' people must be the ones
designing the knowledge modules. 

My 2 pence.


--Tim


-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

GUI-hints in openEHR templates? (Was: PatientOS archetype to formdemo (of sorts))

[Tim Cook]

Hi Richard,

Are you talking about a tool that can read one or more templates and
then aide in development of a GUI that will meet the Common User
Interface specification?

That, I think, is a worthwhile approach. While it is another layer.  It
does help keep the templates simple and purposeful on a semantic level.

--Tim



On Fri, 2008-06-27 at 10:51 +0100, Richard Kavanagh (NHS Connecting for
Health) wrote:
> Within the NHS in the UK we are experiencing a similar need.
> 
> We wish to be able to define the "visual" presentation of a given template
> so that it can be ( in our case ) rendered in a format that is sensible for
> end-user review. The current experiences we have when clinicians review the
> HTML rendered templates are not productive. There is too much discussion on
> the aesthetics of the "form" rather than the actual content.
> 
> We are currently considering using a process of applying a "style" to a
> template. This would allow the visual aspects of each data point to be
> controlled ( i.e. screen position, control type i.e. checkbox, combo box etc
> ).
> 
> It would be great to see what requirements others in the community might
> need for such a "tool". We are likely to commission the creation of a tool
> in the near future.
> 
> 
> regards
> Richard Kavanagh
> Interoperability Development Manager
> NHS Connecting for Health
> Richard.Kavanagh at nhs.net
> www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk
> 
> NHS Connecting for Health supports the NHS in providing better, safer care
> by delivering computer systems and services which improve the way patient
> information is stored and accessed.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org
> [mailto:openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org] On Behalf Of Sebastian Garde
> Sent: 27 June 2008 10:31
> To: openehr-technical at openehr.org
> Subject: Re: GUI-hints in openEHR templates? (Was: PatientOS archetype to
> formdemo (of sorts))
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> in my opinion it is 
> 
> i) important to have some form of "GUI layout descriptions" that really
> enable smart GUI generation in the long run. If not, the whole automatic
> process stops just before the GUI, which is not really the best we can do in
> the long run I think.
> 
> ii) However, it is important to keep this separate from templates. For
> example, to be able to display what is in a template on different devices
> ranging from normal to computers via PDAs to potentially your mobile phone,
> different GUI principles may apply. So essentially to me this sound like it
> is
> 1 template to n "GUI layout descriptions".
> 
> Regards
> Sebastian
> 
> J.P. Freriks wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I think that Eric has a point. I had the same experience when 
> > designing a template. I had thoughts about functions in the GUI that I 
> > couldn't save together with the template.
> > IMveryHO, the suggestions about how clinicians want the actual GUI to 
> > look and work when they are designing their templates should be 
> > accommodated for.
> >
> > Just some thoughts:
> >
> > It is not easy to distinguish between just semantics (the template) 
> > and the GUI, which is after all all clinicians have to work with in 
> > clinical practice.
> > Perhaps clinicians will only want to speak about what informations 
> > needs to be presented how, where and when? Perhaps they don't care 
> > about the difference between semantics and workflow, GUI, etc.? 
> > Anyway, it is intuitive to discuss this in one and the same session.
> >
> > The suggestions for workflow or the GUI could be in the form of hints 
> > for auto-generation of the GUI, or just text comments for the human 
> > GUI designer.
> > Maybe the template designer can have a layer for non-semantic 
> > information linked to points in the template intended for GUI 
> > designers, that will not end up in the actual template definitions?
> >
> > Or, another tool could be designed for GUI design. The clinicians will 
> > work with this tool, after which Template designers distil the 
> > semantics for the templates.
> >
> > As I said, just some ideas.
> >
> > Josina Freriks
> >
> >
> > Tim Cook schreef:
> >> These are certainly implementation specific issues and IMHO should
> >> (must) be left there.  
> >>
> >>
> >> --Tim
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, 2008-06-27 at 09:05 +0100, Ian McNicoll wrote:
> >>   
> >>> Hi Eric,
> >>>
> >>> Good

GUI-hints in openEHR templates? (Was: PatientOS archetype to form demo (of sorts))

[Tim Cook]

These are certainly implementation specific issues and IMHO should
(must) be left there.  


--Tim




On Fri, 2008-06-27 at 09:05 +0100, Ian McNicoll wrote:
> Hi Eric,
> 
> Good points.
> 
> As you know, the NHS use of openEHR to date has been to specify
> clinical content for the iSoft Lorenzo product, particularly for a
> number of user-specified forms. One of the areas of difficulty has
> been the tension between keeping the Template as a description of
> use-case data content and the requirement to match the UI of the
> end-user form, both for cross-checking by the users and for the
> application designers. We found that there is a limit to the extent
> that this can be done without compromising the quality of the template
> and underlying archetypes.
> 
> There is a clear need for some UI rendering suggestions/rules but
> current thinking is that is best left to another layer of
> documentation, rather than including it within the Template spec. We
> did experiment with some 'dummy' UI instruction archetypes but this
> remains somewhat clumsy.
> 
> There are a couple of exceptions which through current Ocean use are
> within the Template Spec
> 
> 1. 'Hide from UI' is used, very specifically to hide intermediate
> branch nodes from HTML and Ocean forms representations of the
> Template.
> 
> e.g
> 
>  Patient Details
>   Name
> Structured Name
>  Surname
> 
> 
> is flattened to
> 
> Patient Details
>  Surname
> 
> in the HTML and Ocean forms output.
> 
> 
> 2. Conditional visiblilty.  As you suggest, this can become highly
> complex but there are some simple, universal conditionals which should
> be true for all instances e.g Only display if the patient is female,
> or over a certain age. The latest version of the Ocean Template Editor
> supports this feature but it is not designed to deal with complex
> interaction between data and UI, which starts to encroach on decision/
> workflow support, or with other 'static' UIrendering advice,like "only
> display if button x is pressed" - this is probably best left to a
> higher layer.
> 
> A further discussion of the possible requirements for supra-Template
> UI rendering would be very helpful.
> 
> Ian
> 
> 
> Dr Ian McNicoll
> office / fax +44(0)141 560 4657
> mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859
> skype ianmcnicoll
> 
> Consultant - Ocean Informatics ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com
> Consultant - IRIS GP Accounts
> 
> Member of BCS Primary Health Care Specialist Group ? www.phcsg.org
> 
> 
> 2008/6/27 Erik Sundvall :
> > Hi!
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 07:08, Greg Caulton  wrote:
> >> Thanks to the java reference implementation I have a demo of importing
> >> archetypes to auto generate forms which have the references to the
> >> archetype.
> >
> > Nice. Keep up the good work.
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 07:08, Greg Caulton  wrote:
> >> One thing I noticed in the conversion that I don't have any way of
> >> distinguishing between a line of text and multiline text in the
> >> archetype (I would generate an appropriate pane in the latter case).
> >> Perhaps not a big deal.
> >
> > This might be a useful requirement for the current template
> > specification currently being worked on, or possibly a new kind of
> > related specification.
> >
> > I first thought that templates so far had been considered as purely
> > specifying semantics and that they were not supposed to give hints
> > regarding GUI rendering. But now I see a parameter "hide_in_ui" in the
> > class T_COMPLEX_OBJECT found in the draft template specification. (A
> > similar function is present in the Template Designer tool from Ocean
> > Informatics there is an option to "hide" elements instead of
> > constraining them to zero occurrence, in the output file this is
> > persisted as hide_on_form="true".) Could anybody detail it's intended
> > use a bit more?
> >
> > I think GUI rendering hints can be appropriate to specify at the same
> > point in time as template design is taking place. If the hints are to
> > be persisted in the template file or in a separate file I guess could
> > be discussed, keeping it in the file could have maintenance
> > advantages, but probably has some disadvantages too. Thoughts? (And
> > no, GUI hints are not appropriate in Archetypes since they are meant
> > to have a wider reuse and the use cases are not known in the same
> > detail as for templates.)
> >
> > In some of our implementation experiments and in discussions with
> > clinicians a possible need for specifying detail levels in templates
> > have surfaced. Some elements from archetypes are easy to completely
> > dismiss or include for the specific use case in mind when designing a
> > template clinicians will say things like "this will always be needed"
> > or "this will never be needed". Other things could be conditional and
> > trickier "you can't have all these details om the form - users would
> > go crazy - let them show up if i click a plus-button or if i tick
> > value x was true".
> >

Step by step Achetype editing

[Tim Cook]

On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 15:31 +0200, P?ria Kashfi wrote:
> Hi all,
> I've just started browsing and investigating two existing archetype  
> editors,
> hardly could I find a step by step tutorial for creating Archetypes  
> (and then Templates)
> Is there any recommended resource?

AFAIK there isn't a step-by-step tutorial.  There are many resources on
the website and I suppose they can be a bit daunting to navigate.   

There is an ongoing discussion on the openEHR Clinical list on deciding
how to select an archetype type to begin creating a specific archetype.

To get you started you might refer to this discussion and the very nice
presentation that Gerard Freriks just published on the openEHR website.

Discussion:
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/private/openehr-clinical/2008-June/000894.html
 

There are related threads on this so you'll need to read several.

Presentation: http://tinyurl.com/6h2vs8

HTH,
--Tim



-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

[Fwd: First Call for Papers: DSL WC]

[Tim Cook]

It would be interesting if someone could present ADL/AQL at this
conference:

http://www.resource-aware.org/twiki/bin/view/WG211/DSLWC

 Forwarded Message 
From: Emir Pasalic 

Subject: First Call for Papers: DSL WC
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:49:54 -0400

IFIP Working Conference on Domain Specific Languages (DSL WC)
July 15-17, 2009, Oxford

CALL FOR PAPERS

Domain-specific languages are emerging as a fundamental component of  
software engineering practice. DSLs are often introduced when new  
domains such as web-scripting or markup come into existence, but it is  
also common to see DSLs being introduced and adopted for traditional  
domains such as parsing and data description. Developing software  
using DSLs has many benefits. DSLs are often designed based on  
existing notations that are already in use by experts in a given  
domain. As such, successful DSLs often reduce or eliminate the effort  
needed to transform the concept or innovation produced by the domain  
expert into an executable artifact or even a deliverable software  
product. DSL implementations can capture and mechanize a significant  
portion of the repetitive and mechanical tasks that a domain expert  
traditionally needed to perform in order to produce an executable.  
DSLs can in many cases capture and make widely available special  
expertise that only top specialists in a given domain might have. By  
capturing expert knowledge and reducing repetitive tasks, DSLs often  
also lead to software that is significantly more portable, more  
reliable and more understandable than it would otherwise be.

DSLs can be viewed as having a dual role to general-purpose languages:  
whereas general purpose languages try to do everything as well as  
possible, DSLs are designed to find a domain where they can solve some  
class of problems -- no matter how small -- in the best possible way.  
Widely known examples of DSLs include Matlab, Verilog, SQL, LINQ,  
JavaScript, PERL, HTML, Open GL, Tcl/Tk, Macromedia Director,  
Mathematica/Maple, AutoLisp/AutoCAD, XSLT, RPM, Make, lex/yacc, LaTeX,  
PostScript, Excel, among many others. But while these tools have been  
widely successful, they still fall short of realizing the full idea  
behind them. The goal of this conference is to explore the extent to  
which incorporating modern principles of language design and software  
engineering can benefit existing and future domain-specific languages.

The ultimate goal of using DSLs is to improve programmer productivity  
and software quality. Often, this is achieved by reducing the cost of  
initial software development as well as maintenance costs. These  
improvements - programs being easier to write and maintain -  
materialize as a result of domain-specific guarantees, analyses,  
testing techniques, verification techniques, and optimizations.

* Paper Criteria
Papers are sought addressing the research problems, fundamental  
principles, and practical techniques of DSLs, including but not  
limited to:
   - Foundations, including semantics, formal methods, type  
theory, and complexity theory
   - Language design, ranging from concrete syntax to semantic and  
typing issues
   - Software engineering, including domain analysis, software  
design, and round-trip engineering
   - Software processes, including metrics for software and  
language evaluation
   - Implementation techniques, including parsing, compiling, and  
program generation
   - Program analysis and automated transformation
   - Reverse engineering, re-engineering, design discovery,  
automated refactoring
   - Hardware/software codesign
   - Programming environments, including visual languages,  
debuggers, and testing infrastructure
   - Teaching DSLs and the use of DSLs in teaching
   - Case studies, including engineering, bioinformatics, hardware  
specification languages, parallel computing languages, real-time and  
embedded systems, and networked and distributed domains

Papers will be judged on the depth of their insight and the extent to  
which they translate specific experience into general lessons for  
domain-specific language designers and implementers, and software  
engineers. Papers can range from the practical to the theoretical;  
where appropriate, they should refer to actual languages, tools, and  
techniques, provide pointers to full definitions and implementations,  
and include empirical data on results.

* Important Dates
   - December 14th, 2008: Abstract submission due. Firm, will not  
have any extensions
   - December 21st, 2008: Paper submission deadline. Firm, will  
not have any extensions
   - February 23rd, 2009: Author notification of decisions
   - March 22nd, 2009: Camera ready manuscripts due

* Program Committee
   - Jon Bentley, Avayalabs
   - Martin Erwig, Oregon State University
   - Jeff Gray, University of Alabama at Birmingham
 

openEHR Querying specifications

[Tim Cook]

On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 11:36 +0930, Heath Frankel wrote:
> The v1draft convention is already deprecated.  The BNF for AQL doesn't
> support it deliberately, to ensure only non-draft archetypes are used when
> committing/retrieving data.
> 
> Heath 


The previously referred to AQL BNF carries this header:

"Name"= 'EhrBank Query Lanaguage (EQL) - {Equal}'
"Version" = '0.4'
"Date" = '14 September 2006'
"Author"  = 'Chunlan Ma & Heath Frankel'

We know it has been renamed from EQL to AQL but I am wondering if there
is a newer version available anywhere?

Thanks,
Tim




-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: