Re: Advantage of ISO

2015-09-09 Thread Thomas Beale
Bert, my comments relate to software only, contributed by companies and other organisations at their own development expense. It has nothing to do with specifications, nor specification-related computational artefacts (grammars, XSDs, and the like). These are all issued by the foundation,

Re: Advantage of ISO

2015-09-09 Thread Bert Verhees
On 09-09-15 10:24, Thomas Beale wrote: I hope this is clearer. - thomas It sure is. I totally agree. Bert ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org

Re: Advantage of ISO

2015-09-09 Thread Bert Verhees
On 09-09-15 04:20, Thomas Beale wrote: On 08/09/2015 21:55, Erik Sundvall wrote: Hi! ND on the specification documents is not a big or urgent problem if there are Apace 2 licenced computable artifacts like UML-files/descriptions of all classes, ADL/AQL grammars, openEHR term

Re: Advantage of ISO

2015-09-09 Thread Thomas Beale
Bert, I fail to see the origin of any ambiguity from within openEHR. The specifications have been free and open for 15 years, since 2000 (or soon thereafter, since some were issued around 2002/2003 for the first time, and some later). This has always been clearly stated even in the old

RE: A question about the XML schema for version 1.4 archetypes

2015-09-09 Thread Barnet David (HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE INFORMATION CENTRE)
Hi Sebastian I've tested a dozen or so archetypes from various CKMs, (some with and some without), and all the XML downloads verify against the schema. Thanks very much for the fix Dave Barnet From: Sebastian Garde [mailto:sebastian.ga...@oceaninformatics.com] Sent: Tue 08/09/2015 15:33 To: