On 12-12-18 15:44, Diego Boscá wrote:
When I say official I refer to AOM. If AOM/ADL let's you say something
we try to support it. We always 'eat' what others tools produce, and
have implemented export mechanisms to be compatible with the things
other tools can handle. In this particular case y
We plan in using Archie library when we migrate our tools for ADL2 :)
El mié., 12 dic. 2018 15:24, Thomas Beale
escribió:
> You can always check conformance with the ADL Workbench, it will consume
> ADL1.4 and ADL2. And Archie now produces the same regression results as
> ADL WB, so it could be
When I say official I refer to AOM. If AOM/ADL let's you say something we
try to support it. We always 'eat' what others tools produce, and have
implemented export mechanisms to be compatible with the things other tools
can handle. In this particular case you mentioned, an exported archetype
from L
You can always check conformance with the ADL Workbench, it will consume
ADL1.4 and ADL2. And Archie now produces the same regression results as
ADL WB, so it could be used as well, and in future, will probably become
the main reference tool.
- thomas
___
On 12-12-18 14:49, Diego Boscá wrote:
These are modifications on the parser, which parses more things than
your standard parser. In fact, the editor supports legal things in ADL
that other parsers don't (e.g. explicit node identifiers or
existence). The generated ADL is completely fine ADL. The
These are modifications on the parser, which parses more things than your
standard parser. In fact, the editor supports legal things in ADL that
other parsers don't (e.g. explicit node identifiers or existence). The
generated ADL is completely fine ADL. There are tools that don't comply
with this g
On 12-12-18 13:48, Diego Boscá wrote:
The official one, these are 'hacks' that allow you to handle
requirements and edge cases only present in these RM archetypes
Diego, I don't want to be harsh about LinkEhr, which is a very strong
product. But this situation raises questions. I already had t
I don't think they are currently generated, but you can generate them if
you reimport the model and select them
El mié., 12 dic. 2018 a las 13:44, Georg Fette (<
georg.fe...@uni-wuerzburg.de>) escribió:
> Hello,
> In the LinkEHR files the archetypes for the "EHR Infomation Model" are
> contained
The official one, these are 'hacks' that allow you to handle requirements
and edge cases only present in these RM archetypes
El mié., 12 dic. 2018 a las 13:41, Bert Verhees ()
escribió:
> On 12-12-18 12:53, Diego Boscá wrote:
> > We used that one as a basis and generalized mostly to allow the
> >
When importing the schema you can chose which are your business entities
for a given RM. If you need that archetype you can reimport the model any
time you want from the schemas and select more classes as archetypable.
El mié., 12 dic. 2018 a las 13:36, Georg Fette (<
georg.fe...@uni-wuerzburg.de>
Grammar (and parser classes) are derived from the original one available in
the repo, so the same license applies.
These are edge cases we detected the original parser didn't treat well
(recursive internal references) and were also fixed.
El mié., 12 dic. 2018 a las 13:19, Georg Fette (<
georg.fe.
Hello,
In the LinkEHR files the archetypes for the "EHR Infomation Model" are
contained (ACTION, CLUSTER, etc.). Are there also somewhere archetypes
that describe the "Data Types Information Model" (e.g. DV_QUANTITY,
DV_MEDIA, etc.).
Greetings
Georg
--
On 12-12-18 12:53, Diego Boscá wrote:
We used that one as a basis and generalized mostly to allow the
special RM 'at' codes we created. I can send you the modified grammar
or the parser if you want.
Wouldn't that disturb interoperability processes? One could wonder:
Which one is the right gra
Hi Diego,
In the Archetypes contained in the LinkEHR files I am missing the
subclasses that are subclassed by the root archetypes. In ACTION for
example the subclass INSTRUCTION_DETAILS is used. This is used in the
ACTION.adl file and it is parseable but I wonder if there is an
INSTRUCTION_DET
Hi Diego,
Yes, if you have a working parser for those archetypes that would be
useful. The modified grammer would also be useful.
What are the copyright constraints on your parser and your grammmer file ?
I managed to get one of the archetypes parsed by lowercasing the
language codes and removi
We used that one as a basis and generalized mostly to allow the special RM
'at' codes we created. I can send you the modified grammar or the parser if
you want.
El mié., 12 dic. 2018 a las 12:46, Georg Fette (<
georg.fe...@uni-wuerzburg.de>) escribió:
> Hi Diego,
> I just tried to parse the .adl
Hi Diego,
I just tried to parse the .adl files from LinkEHR and got several
Exceptions. I currently use the adl-parser from
org.openehr.java-libs_v_1.0.71.
Which parser can I use to parse those archetypes ?
Greetings
Georg
--
They are generated from different "root" XML Schemas (demographics and
ehr), but in principle the contents should be the same. Models are
generated in a standalone way, so no assumptions are made regarding if ehr
model shares classes with demographic one (or any other model already
imported). As th
Hi Diego,
Thank you, that is exactly what I was looking for.
In the DEMOGRAPHICS and the EHR package there are 6 archetypes which
have the same name but differ only in their full path name: CLUSTER,
ELEMENT, ITEM_LIST, ITEM_SINGLE, ITEM_TABLE and ITEM_TREE. Why are they
two versions of those ar
But in this case the archetype you create couldn't be use for validation
purposes. I think I'm not fully understanding what you mean with this
El mar., 11 dic. 2018 a las 12:37, Thomas Beale ()
escribió:
> I think this is more or less the same as a kind of archetype with no codes
> at all, only c
I think this is more or less the same as a kind of archetype with no
codes at all, only containing RM elements.
I was expecting something more like:
CLASS [Observation_code] matches {
attributes matches {
ATTRIBUTE [Observation_data_code] matches {
name matches {"data"}
As an example, this is the Observation archetype
https://pastebin.com/WhehexLR
El mar., 11 dic. 2018 a las 11:53, Diego Boscá ()
escribió:
> It is basically AOM, serialized as ADL files
>
> El mar., 11 dic. 2018 a las 11:51, Thomas Beale ()
> escribió:
>
>> Diego,
>>
>> what do you use as the un
It is basically AOM, serialized as ADL files
El mar., 11 dic. 2018 a las 11:51, Thomas Beale ()
escribió:
> Diego,
>
> what do you use as the underlying information model in that case?
> Presumably the BMM/UML meta-model, i.e. things like Class, Attribute etc?
>
> - thomas
>
> On 11/12/2018 09:40
Diego,
what do you use as the underlying information model in that case?
Presumably the BMM/UML meta-model, i.e. things like Class, Attribute etc?
- thomas
On 11/12/2018 09:40, Diego Boscá wrote:
Hi Georg,
That's exactly how we define reference models with LinkEHR. We
generated them from t
u can download LinkEHR and get them from
there.
Regards
El mar., 11 dic. 2018 a las 10:20, Georg Fette (<
georg.fe...@uni-wuerzburg.de>) escribió:
> Hello,
> Is there somewere a machine readable definition available which
> describes the content of the openEHR Reference Model a
Hello,
Is there somewere a machine readable definition available which
describes the content of the openEHR Reference Model as Archetypes ?
The Reference Model classes should be expressable as Archetypes,
shouldn't they ? At least concerning their logical data model. The
methods they
26 matches
Mail list logo
