Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id
I've created the issue on JIRA: http://www.openehr.org/issues/browse/SPECPR-99 Hope this helps to clarify the use of the system_id :) -- Kind regards, Eng. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez http://cabolabs.com From: colin.sut...@ctc.usyd.edu.au To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org Subject: Re: Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 17:34:55 + Instead of system_id, should it be called the EHR_service_id or the repository_id? To be meaningful, should there be a reference service to allocate a unique id to each service/repository, or should the system_id be a URL? Colin On 9 Sep 2014, at 2:06 am, pablo pazos pazospablo at hotmail.com wrote: Thanks Heath. Can others comment on this to have a unified view and specific definition of the system id? I think i have 3 different definitions right now, and one contradicts the other :) Maybe the system_id hasn't a specific definition so might be used differently by different implementations. (?) In the end is just an id, does it matter if it's attached to a system or service or if it's something related to an organization or if it's a host domain? What do you think? -- Kind regards, Eng. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez http://cabolabs.com From: heath.fran...@oceaninformatics.com To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org Subject: RE: Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2014 23:25:43 + Hi Pablo, No I don't agree. The point I tried to explain was that the system is the EHR repository, not an application. So if there is one or more applications using a repository at one or more organisations the is just one system id. In an Australian jurisdiction I have a repository that is used by multiple instances of 5 applications at 100 diff healthcare facilities managed by gov't and non gov't organisations. There is only one system id for the repository. Heath Original Message Subject: RE: Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id From: pablo pazos pazospa...@hotmail.com To: openeh technical openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org CC: Hi! Thanks for your answers. It is a little tricky but from Thomas comments, I think that the system is not a technical term, but is more related to an organizational term. For example, if I use the same system / service to hold EHRs from 2 different hospitals, I really have 2 system ids instead of one. So the system_id doesn't depend on the technical architecture, but depends on how the business is organized. Is that correct? Again, the description from the specs doesn't help to understand this (Identity of the system where the change was committed, so it depends on what a system is for us). For the next version of the specs I think we can update that description and maybe give a couple of examples. What do you think? -- Kind regards, Eng. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez http://cabolabs.com Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 09:47:35 +0100 From: thomas.be...@oceaninformatics.com To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org Subject: Re: Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id Heath, this is correct, you were not wrong for 10 y ;-) We don't record the name or type or id of the application, and I am not sure even now if that would be of any use. I can't see that it would be. The system_id is for exactly the purpose that Heath as explained here. - thomas On 21/08/2014 00:27, Heath Frankel wrote: Hi Thomas Pablo, I am finding the words in the this discussion ambiguous, and the specification does help to clarify. Here is my interpretation of AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id. I have an EHR service, which is used by two different application, one is a hospital system and another a mobile application that may not be related to the hospital system but share the same EHR service. When the hospital system and mobile application commits something they are using the same system_id, the system_id of the EHR service. If there is an exchange of data between this EHR service and another organisations EHR service via an EHR extract, the system ID will be used in the other organisations EHR service to identify that the commit was performed in the original organisations system_id. Therefore, the system_id identifies the system that is assigning version identifiers in the EHR repository, i.e. the AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id matches the system_id component of the version.uid. This is important for distributed versioning. So in Pablo?s scenario, it is one system of multiple components with multiple components sharing the same EHR service, the mobile and the EMR would use the same system_id. Has my interpretation been wrong for 10 years? If so, then we need clarity added to the specification. ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.orghttp
Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id
Hi Pablo, No I don't agree. The point I tried to explain was that the system is the EHR repository, not an application. So if there is one or more applications using a repository at one or more organisations the is just one system id. In an Australian jurisdiction I have a repository that is used by multiple instances of 5 applications at 100 diff healthcare facilities managed by gov't and non gov't organisations. There is only one system id for the repository. Heath Original Message Subject: RE: Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id From: pablo pazos pazospa...@hotmail.com To: openeh technical openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org CC: Hi! Thanks for your answers. It is a little tricky but from Thomas comments, I think that the system is not a technical term, but is more related to an organizational term. For example, if I use the same system / service to hold EHRs from 2 different hospitals, I really have 2 system ids instead of one. So the system_id doesn't depend on the technical architecture, but depends on how the business is organized. Is that correct? Again, the description from the specs doesn't help to understand this (Identity of the system where the change was committed, so it depends on what a system is for us). For the next version of the specs I think we can update that description and maybe give a couple of examples. What do you think? -- Kind regards, Eng. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez http://cabolabs.comhttp://cabolabs.com/es/homehttp://twitter.com/ppazos Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 09:47:35 +0100 From: thomas.be...@oceaninformatics.com To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org Subject: Re: Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id Heath, this is correct, you were not wrong for 10 y ;-) We don't record the name or type or id of the application, and I am not sure even now if that would be of any use. I can't see that it would be. The system_id is for exactly the purpose that Heath as explained here. - thomas On 21/08/2014 00:27, Heath Frankel wrote: Hi Thomas Pablo, I am finding the words in the this discussion ambiguous, and the specification does help to clarify. Here is my interpretation of AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id. I have an EHR service, which is used by two different application, one is a hospital system and another a mobile application that may not be related to the hospital system but share the same EHR service. When the hospital system and mobile application commits something they are using the same system_id, the system_id of the EHR service. If there is an exchange of data between this EHR service and another organisations EHR service via an EHR extract, the system ID will be used in the other organisations EHR service to identify that the commit was performed in the original organisations system_id. Therefore, the system_id identifies the system that is assigning version identifiers in the EHR repository, i.e. the AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id matches the system_id component of the version.uid. This is important for distributed versioning. So in Pablo?s scenario, it is one system of multiple components with multiple components sharing the same EHR service, the mobile and the EMR would use the same system_id. Has my interpretation been wrong for 10 years? If so, then we need clarity added to the specification. ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20140907/cbf0d0ed/attachment.html
Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id
Thanks Heath. Can others comment on this to have a unified view and specific definition of the system id? I think i have 3 different definitions right now, and one contradicts the other :) Maybe the system_id hasn't a specific definition so might be used differently by different implementations. (?) In the end is just an id, does it matter if it's attached to a system or service or if it's something related to an organization or if it's a host domain? What do you think? -- Kind regards, Eng. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez http://cabolabs.com From: heath.fran...@oceaninformatics.com To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org Subject: RE: Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2014 23:25:43 + Hi Pablo, No I don't agree. The point I tried to explain was that the system is the EHR repository, not an application. So if there is one or more applications using a repository at one or more organisations the is just one system id. In an Australian jurisdiction I have a repository that is used by multiple instances of 5 applications at 100 diff healthcare facilities managed by gov't and non gov't organisations. There is only one system id for the repository. Heath Original Message Subject: RE: Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id From: pablo pazos pazospa...@hotmail.com To: openeh technical openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org CC: Hi! Thanks for your answers. It is a little tricky but from Thomas comments, I think that the system is not a technical term, but is more related to an organizational term. For example, if I use the same system / service to hold EHRs from 2 different hospitals, I really have 2 system ids instead of one. So the system_id doesn't depend on the technical architecture, but depends on how the business is organized. Is that correct? Again, the description from the specs doesn't help to understand this (Identity of the system where the change was committed, so it depends on what a system is for us). For the next version of the specs I think we can update that description and maybe give a couple of examples. What do you think? -- Kind regards, Eng. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez http://cabolabs.com Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 09:47:35 +0100 From: thomas.be...@oceaninformatics.com To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org Subject: Re: Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id Heath, this is correct, you were not wrong for 10 y ;-) We don't record the name or type or id of the application, and I am not sure even now if that would be of any use. I can't see that it would be. The system_id is for exactly the purpose that Heath as explained here. - thomas On 21/08/2014 00:27, Heath Frankel wrote: Hi Thomas Pablo, I am finding the words in the this discussion ambiguous, and the specification does help to clarify. Here is my interpretation of AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id. I have an EHR service, which is used by two different application, one is a hospital system and another a mobile application that may not be related to the hospital system but share the same EHR service. When the hospital system and mobile application commits something they are using the same system_id, the system_id of the EHR service. If there is an exchange of data between this EHR service and another organisations EHR service via an EHR extract, the system ID will be used in the other organisations EHR service to identify that the commit was performed in the original organisations system_id. Therefore, the system_id identifies the system that is assigning version identifiers in the EHR repository, i.e. the AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id matches the system_id component of the version.uid. This is important for distributed versioning. So in Pablo?s scenario, it is one system of multiple components with multiple components sharing the same EHR service, the mobile and the EMR would use the same system_id. Has my interpretation been wrong for 10 years? If so, then we need clarity added to the specification. ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20140908/655d1448/attachment.html
Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id
Instead of system_id, should it be called the EHR_service_id or the repository_id? To be meaningful, should there be a reference service to allocate a unique id to each service/repository, or should the system_id be a URL? Colin On 9 Sep 2014, at 2:06 am, pablo pazos pazospablo at hotmail.commailto:pazospablo at hotmail.com wrote: Thanks Heath. Can others comment on this to have a unified view and specific definition of the system id? I think i have 3 different definitions right now, and one contradicts the other :) Maybe the system_id hasn't a specific definition so might be used differently by different implementations. (?) In the end is just an id, does it matter if it's attached to a system or service or if it's something related to an organization or if it's a host domain? What do you think? -- Kind regards, Eng. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez http://cabolabs.comhttp://cabolabs.com/es/homehttp://twitter.com/ppazos From: heath.frankel at oceaninformatics.commailto:heath.fran...@oceaninformatics.com To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.orgmailto:openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org Subject: RE: Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2014 23:25:43 + Hi Pablo, No I don't agree. The point I tried to explain was that the system is the EHR repository, not an application. So if there is one or more applications using a repository at one or more organisations the is just one system id. In an Australian jurisdiction I have a repository that is used by multiple instances of 5 applications at 100 diff healthcare facilities managed by gov't and non gov't organisations. There is only one system id for the repository. Heath Original Message Subject: RE: Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id From: pablo pazos pazospablo at hotmail.commailto:pazospa...@hotmail.com To: openeh technical openehr-technical at lists.openehr.orgmailto:openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org CC: Hi! Thanks for your answers. It is a little tricky but from Thomas comments, I think that the system is not a technical term, but is more related to an organizational term. For example, if I use the same system / service to hold EHRs from 2 different hospitals, I really have 2 system ids instead of one. So the system_id doesn't depend on the technical architecture, but depends on how the business is organized. Is that correct? Again, the description from the specs doesn't help to understand this (Identity of the system where the change was committed, so it depends on what a system is for us). For the next version of the specs I think we can update that description and maybe give a couple of examples. What do you think? -- Kind regards, Eng. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez http://cabolabs.comhttp://cabolabs.com/es/homehttp://twitter.com/ppazos Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 09:47:35 +0100 From: thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.commailto:thomas.be...@oceaninformatics.com To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.orgmailto:openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org Subject: Re: Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id Heath, this is correct, you were not wrong for 10 y ;-) We don't record the name or type or id of the application, and I am not sure even now if that would be of any use. I can't see that it would be. The system_id is for exactly the purpose that Heath as explained here. - thomas On 21/08/2014 00:27, Heath Frankel wrote: Hi Thomas Pablo, I am finding the words in the this discussion ambiguous, and the specification does help to clarify. Here is my interpretation of AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id. I have an EHR service, which is used by two different application, one is a hospital system and another a mobile application that may not be related to the hospital system but share the same EHR service. When the hospital system and mobile application commits something they are using the same system_id, the system_id of the EHR service. If there is an exchange of data between this EHR service and another organisations EHR service via an EHR extract, the system ID will be used in the other organisations EHR service to identify that the commit was performed in the original organisations system_id. Therefore, the system_id identifies the system that is assigning version identifiers in the EHR repository, i.e. the AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id matches the system_id component of the version.uid. This is important for distributed versioning. So in Pablo?s scenario, it is one system of multiple components with multiple components sharing the same EHR service, the mobile and the EMR would use the same system_id. Has my interpretation been wrong for 10 years? If so, then we need clarity added to the specification. ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical
Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id
Hi! Thanks for your answers. It is a little tricky but from Thomas comments, I think that the system is not a technical term, but is more related to an organizational term. For example, if I use the same system / service to hold EHRs from 2 different hospitals, I really have 2 system ids instead of one. So the system_id doesn't depend on the technical architecture, but depends on how the business is organized. Is that correct? Again, the description from the specs doesn't help to understand this (Identity of the system where the change was committed, so it depends on what a system is for us). For the next version of the specs I think we can update that description and maybe give a couple of examples. What do you think? -- Kind regards, Eng. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez http://cabolabs.com Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 09:47:35 +0100 From: thomas.be...@oceaninformatics.com To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org Subject: Re: Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id Heath, this is correct, you were not wrong for 10 y ;-) We don't record the name or type or id of the application, and I am not sure even now if that would be of any use. I can't see that it would be. The system_id is for exactly the purpose that Heath as explained here. - thomas On 21/08/2014 00:27, Heath Frankel wrote: Hi Thomas Pablo, I am finding the words in the this discussion ambiguous, and the specification does help to clarify. Here is my interpretation of AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id. I have an EHR service, which is used by two different application, one is a hospital system and another a mobile application that may not be related to the hospital system but share the same EHR service. When the hospital system and mobile application commits something they are using the same system_id, the system_id of the EHR service. If there is an exchange of data between this EHR service and another organisations EHR service via an EHR extract, the system ID will be used in the other organisations EHR service to identify that the commit was performed in the original organisations system_id. Therefore, the system_id identifies the system that is assigning version identifiers in the EHR repository, i.e. the AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id matches the system_id component of the version.uid. This is important for distributed versioning. So in Pablo?s scenario, it is one system of multiple components with multiple components sharing the same EHR service, the mobile and the EMR would use the same system_id. Has my interpretation been wrong for 10 years? If so, then we need clarity added to the specification. ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20140905/a7103df4/attachment.html
Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id
Pablo, you may have already done this, but please make sure there is an issue on the issue tracker http://www.openehr.org/issues/browse/SPECPR/ to capture this. If you include various email responses in the 'description' section that will help. I actually think that the 'system' should refer to a domain name, not a 'soft name'. But in the long term, neither may be reliable. - thomas On 05/09/2014 18:06, pablo pazos wrote: Hi! Thanks for your answers. It is a little tricky but from Thomas comments, I think that the system is not a technical term, but is more related to an organizational term. For example, if I use the same system / service to hold EHRs from 2 different hospitals, I really have 2 system ids instead of one. So the system_id doesn't depend on the technical architecture, but depends on how the business is organized. Is that correct? Again, the description from the specs doesn't help to understand this (Identity of the system where the change was committed, so it depends on what a system is for us). For the next version of the specs I think we can update that description and maybe give a couple of examples. What do you think? -- Kind regards, Eng. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez http://cabolabs.com http://cabolabs.com/es/home Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 09:47:35 +0100 From: thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org Subject: Re: Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id Heath, this is correct, you were not wrong for 10 y ;-) We don't record the name or type or id of the application, and I am not sure even now if that would be of any use. I can't see that it would be. The system_id is for exactly the purpose that Heath as explained here. - thomas On 21/08/2014 00:27, Heath Frankel wrote: Hi Thomas Pablo, I am finding the words in the this discussion ambiguous, and the specification does help to clarify. Here is my interpretation of AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id. I have an EHR service, which is used by two different application, one is a hospital system and another a mobile application that may not be related to the hospital system but share the same EHR service. When the hospital system and mobile application commits something they are using the same system_id, the system_id of the EHR service. If there is an exchange of data between this EHR service and another organisations EHR service via an EHR extract, the system ID will be used in the other organisations EHR service to identify that the commit was performed in the original organisations system_id. Therefore, the system_id identifies the system that is assigning version identifiers in the EHR repository, i.e. the AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id matches the system_id component of the version.uid. This is important for distributed versioning. So in Pablo's scenario, it is one system of multiple components with multiple components sharing the same EHR service, the mobile and the EMR would use the same system_id. Has my interpretation been wrong for 10 years? If so, then we need clarity added to the specification. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20140905/f8c6d8f2/attachment-0001.html
Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id
On 05-09-14 19:06, pablo pazos wrote: Hi! Thanks for your answers. It is a little tricky but from Thomas comments, I think that the system is not a technical term, but is more related to an organizational term. For example, if I use the same system / service to hold EHRs from 2 different hospitals, I really have 2 system ids instead of one. So the system_id doesn't depend on the technical architecture, but depends on how the business is organized. Is that correct? I must admit, that this is confusing to me too. And I have some more confusing. That is the ID of a VERSION, which is: Unique identifier of this version, containing owner_id, creating_system_id and version_tree_id. So, if you don't know the creating_system_id of a specific version, you are not able to find it. And can there be more same-versions of the same dataset with the same ID but on different environments? It would be branching, wouldn't it? That would be the right solution, the same as with sourcecode, if two people work on the same checkout they need to go branching. So I put the Kernel_ID (which is in the config file) in the creating_system_id, so it stays the same, even if it is clustered, or moved to another machine. I can understand if there is a client systemId in the Contribution, or in the Audit, but it seems, there isn't. You want to know who put the data there, you want to know when it happened, so, why should not you want to know where it happened? I therefor understood the System_id as the machine where the commit happened, maybe a cell-phone, maybe a device, whatever. Bert Again, the description from the specs doesn't help to understand this (Identity of the system where the change was committed, so it depends on what a system is for us). For the next version of the specs I think we can update that description and maybe give a couple of examples. What do you think? -- Kind regards, Eng. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez http://cabolabs.com http://cabolabs.com/es/home Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 09:47:35 +0100 From: thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org Subject: Re: Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id Heath, this is correct, you were not wrong for 10 y ;-) We don't record the name or type or id of the application, and I am not sure even now if that would be of any use. I can't see that it would be. The system_id is for exactly the purpose that Heath as explained here. - thomas On 21/08/2014 00:27, Heath Frankel wrote: Hi Thomas Pablo, I am finding the words in the this discussion ambiguous, and the specification does help to clarify. Here is my interpretation of AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id. I have an EHR service, which is used by two different application, one is a hospital system and another a mobile application that may not be related to the hospital system but share the same EHR service. When the hospital system and mobile application commits something they are using the same system_id, the system_id of the EHR service. If there is an exchange of data between this EHR service and another organisations EHR service via an EHR extract, the system ID will be used in the other organisations EHR service to identify that the commit was performed in the original organisations system_id. Therefore, the system_id identifies the system that is assigning version identifiers in the EHR repository, i.e. the AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id matches the system_id component of the version.uid. This is important for distributed versioning. So in Pablo?s scenario, it is one system of multiple components with multiple components sharing the same EHR service, the mobile and the EMR would use the same system_id. Has my interpretation been wrong for 10 years? If so, then we need clarity added to the specification. ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20140905/9e6ddc33/attachment.html
Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id
I found an issue mentioning the system_id but I don't know if it's related with this thread (don't understand 100% the change description), also it says that is closed: http://www.openehr.org/issues/browse/SPEC-165 -- Kind regards, Eng. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez http://cabolabs.com Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 18:30:02 +0100 From: thomas.be...@oceaninformatics.com To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org Subject: Re: Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id Pablo, you may have already done this, but please make sure there is an issue on the issue tracker to capture this. If you include various email responses in the 'description' section that will help. I actually think that the 'system' should refer to a domain name, not a 'soft name'. But in the long term, neither may be reliable. - thomas On 05/09/2014 18:06, pablo pazos wrote: Hi! Thanks for your answers. It is a little tricky but from Thomas comments, I think that the system is not a technical term, but is more related to an organizational term. For example, if I use the same system / service to hold EHRs from 2 different hospitals, I really have 2 system ids instead of one. So the system_id doesn't depend on the technical architecture, but depends on how the business is organized. Is that correct? Again, the description from the specs doesn't help to understand this (Identity of the system where the change was committed, so it depends on what a system is for us). For the next version of the specs I think we can update that description and maybe give a couple of examples. What do you think? -- Kind regards, Eng. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez http://cabolabs.com Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 09:47:35 +0100 From: thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org Subject: Re: Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id Heath, this is correct, you were not wrong for 10 y ;-) We don't record the name or type or id of the application, and I am not sure even now if that would be of any use. I can't see that it would be. The system_id is for exactly the purpose that Heath as explained here. - thomas On 21/08/2014 00:27, Heath Frankel wrote: Hi Thomas Pablo, I am finding the words in the this discussion ambiguous, and the specification does help to clarify. Here is my interpretation of AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id. I have an EHR service, which is used by two different application, one is a hospital system and another a mobile application that may not be related to the hospital system but share the same EHR service. When the hospital system and mobile application commits something they are using the same system_id, the system_id of the EHR service. If there is an exchange of data between this EHR service and another organisations EHR service via an EHR extract, the system ID will be used in the other organisations EHR service to identify that the commit was performed in the original organisations system_id. Therefore, the system_id identifies the system that is assigning version identifiers in the EHR repository, i.e. the AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id matches the system_id component of the version.uid. This is important for distributed versioning. So in Pablo?s scenario, it is one system of multiple components with multiple components sharing the same EHR service, the mobile and the EMR would use the same system_id
Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id
On 05/09/2014 18:39, pablo pazos wrote: I found an issue mentioning the system_id but I don't know if it's related with this thread (don't understand 100% the change description), also it says that is closed: http://www.openehr.org/issues/browse/SPEC-165 Pablo, I would suggest just to create a new issue. The main point is to record the current issue. - thomas -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20140905/b8a7d232/attachment.html
Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id
Hi Thomas Pablo, I am finding the words in the this discussion ambiguous, and the specification does help to clarify. Here is my interpretation of AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id. I have an EHR service, which is used by two different application, one is a hospital system and another a mobile application that may not be related to the hospital system but share the same EHR service. When the hospital system and mobile application commits something they are using the same system_id, the system_id of the EHR service. If there is an exchange of data between this EHR service and another organisations EHR service via an EHR extract, the system ID will be used in the other organisations EHR service to identify that the commit was performed in the original organisations system_id. Therefore, the system_id identifies the system that is assigning version identifiers in the EHR repository, i.e. the AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id matches the system_id component of the version.uid. This is important for distributed versioning. So in Pablo's scenario, it is one system of multiple components with multiple components sharing the same EHR service, the mobile and the EMR would use the same system_id. Has my interpretation been wrong for 10 years? If so, then we need clarity added to the specification. Heath From: openEHR-technical [mailto:openehr-technical-boun...@lists.openehr.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Beale Sent: Thursday, 21 August 2014 2:05 AM To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org Subject: Re: Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id Hi Pablo, the original idea is that it is an id more like emr1.my_domain.uy - i.e. an actual host domain, so if the data are copied or moved elsewhere, the receiver knows the original EMR system that the data were created on. - thomas On 20/08/2014 17:25, pablo pazos wrote: Hi, I'm reviewing the common_im specs, and the description for AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id is: Identity of the system where the change was committed. Ideally this is a machine- and human-processable identifier, but it may not be. I have an architecture like this: EMR: data input, transactional, specific for 1 medical specialty Mobile APP: data input, transactional, for patient data input EHR: where commits are done to the patient EHR from EMR, Mobile APP and other systems All the system together (EHR, EMR, Mobile APP) is called E-EHR. What should I use as the CONTRIBUTION.audit.system_id when the EHR gets commits from EMR and Mobile APP? (EHR? EMR/Mobile APP?, E-EHR?). -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20140820/d5271530/attachment.html
Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id
Heath, this is correct, you were not wrong for 10 y ;-) We don't record the name or type or id of the application, and I am not sure even now if that would be of any use. I can't see that it would be. The system_id is for exactly the purpose that Heath as explained here. - thomas On 21/08/2014 00:27, Heath Frankel wrote: Hi Thomas Pablo, I am finding the words in the this discussion ambiguous, and the specification does help to clarify. Here is my interpretation of AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id. I have an EHR service, which is used by two different application, one is a hospital system and another a mobile application that may not be related to the hospital system but share the same EHR service. When the hospital system and mobile application commits something they are using the same system_id, the system_id of the EHR service. If there is an exchange of data between this EHR service and another organisations EHR service via an EHR extract, the system ID will be used in the other organisations EHR service to identify that the commit was performed in the original organisations system_id. Therefore, the system_id identifies the system that is assigning version identifiers in the EHR repository, i.e. the AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id matches the system_id component of the version.uid. This is important for distributed versioning. So in Pablo's scenario, it is one system of multiple components with multiple components sharing the same EHR service, the mobile and the EMR would use the same system_id. Has my interpretation been wrong for 10 years? If so, then we need clarity added to the specification. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20140821/c190dff2/attachment-0001.html
Small question about commits and AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id
Hi Pablo, the original idea is that it is an id more like emr1.my_domain.uy - i.e. an actual host domain, so if the data are copied or moved elsewhere, the receiver knows the original EMR system that the data were created on. - thomas On 20/08/2014 17:25, pablo pazos wrote: Hi, I'm reviewing the common_im specs, and the description for AUDIT_DETAILS.system_id is: Identity of the system where the change was committed. Ideally this is a machine- and human-processable identifier, but it may not be. I have an architecture like this: EMR: data input, transactional, specific for 1 medical specialty Mobile APP: data input, transactional, for patient data input EHR: where commits are done to the patient EHR from EMR, Mobile APP and other systems All the system together (EHR, EMR, Mobile APP) is called E-EHR. What should I use as the CONTRIBUTION.audit.system_id when the EHR gets commits from EMR and Mobile APP? (EHR? EMR/Mobile APP?, E-EHR?). -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20140820/f751b5b0/attachment.html
