Re: difference in expressability for archetype and template definitions

[Thomas Beale]

You can see an example of an ADL2 template here 
.


The ADL Workbench and I think Archie as well (and maybe even Better 
/Marand ADL-designer?) will read and write these templates.


- thomas

On 12/10/2019 12:03, Georg Fette wrote:

Hello,
In what extends does the specification language for defining 
archetypes and the language for defining templates differ ?
Both take existing data models (RM types and archetypes) and constrain 
them as needed.
It is often said, that archetypes are used to recombine RM types and 
templates are used to recombine archetypes. But the slot mechanism 
within the archetype definition does as well allow archetypes 
recombination within archetypes. And the constraining that is done 
within templates could as well be done using the constraining 
mechanisms of archetype design.
Why are two specification languages needed ? And if one has elements 
that the other is missing, why can't those elements simply be included 
in the other, to reduce the amount of specification languages ?

Greetings
Georg


--
Thomas Beale
Principal, Ars Semantica 
Consultant, ABD Project, Intermountain Healthcare 

Management Board, Specifications Program Lead, openEHR Foundation 

Health IT blog  | Culture blog 
 | The Objective Stance 

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

Re: difference in expressability for archetype and template definitions

[Diego Boscá]

In ADL2 yes

El sáb., 12 oct. 2019 17:17, Georg Fette 
escribió:

> so, ADL2 is used to define both archetypes as well as templates ?
>
> --
> -
> Dipl.-Inf. Georg Fette  Raum: B001
> Universität WürzburgTel.: +49-(0)931-31-85516
> Am Hubland  Fax.: +49-(0)931-31-86732
> 97074 Würzburg  mail: georg.fe...@uni-wuerzburg.de
> -
>
>
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
>
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
>
___
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org

Re: difference in expressability for archetype and template definitions

[Georg Fette]

so, ADL2 is used to define both archetypes as well as templates ?

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


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

Re: difference in expressability for archetype and template definitions

[Diego Boscá]

Originally they were thought as two different artifacts to live in
different parts of the system. But as you point this is not the case.
That's why in ADL2 both archetypes and templates are describe by the sane
artifacts

In case of ADL1.4, templates que usually describe in OPT, which has
different expressability

El sáb., 12 oct. 2019 17:03, Georg Fette 
escribió:

> Hello,
> In what extends does the specification language for defining archetypes
> and the language for defining templates differ ?
> Both take existing data models (RM types and archetypes) and constrain
> them as needed.
> It is often said, that archetypes are used to recombine RM types and
> templates are used to recombine archetypes. But the slot mechanism
> within the archetype definition does as well allow archetypes
> recombination within archetypes. And the constraining that is done
> within templates could as well be done using the constraining mechanisms
> of archetype design.
> Why are two specification languages needed ? And if one has elements
> that the other is missing, why can't those elements simply be included
> in the other, to reduce the amount of specification languages ?
> Greetings
> Georg
>
> --
> -
> Dipl.-Inf. Georg Fette  Raum: B001
> Universität WürzburgTel.: +49-(0)931-31-85516
> Am Hubland  Fax.: +49-(0)931-31-86732
> 97074 Würzburg  mail: georg.fe...@uni-wuerzburg.de
> -
>
>
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
>
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
>
___
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org

difference in expressability for archetype and template definitions

[Georg Fette]

Hello,
In what extends does the specification language for defining archetypes 
and the language for defining templates differ ?
Both take existing data models (RM types and archetypes) and constrain 
them as needed.
It is often said, that archetypes are used to recombine RM types and 
templates are used to recombine archetypes. But the slot mechanism 
within the archetype definition does as well allow archetypes 
recombination within archetypes. And the constraining that is done 
within templates could as well be done using the constraining mechanisms 
of archetype design.
Why are two specification languages needed ? And if one has elements 
that the other is missing, why can't those elements simply be included 
in the other, to reduce the amount of specification languages ?

Greetings
Georg

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


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