[Date Prev]
[Date Next]
[Thread Prev]
[Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
Re: About parallel archetype editing
Hi Stef,
Thomas beat me to it!!
Namespacing will be crucial to resolving this kind of issue but we will also have to enable some very effective communications between development teams so that as new ideas are added locally, they can be disseminated quickly where they have universal appeal. We have a number of ideas to help with this
Federating CKMs so that local changes are flagged up to participating developers
A pre-CKM space where developers can share archetypes and ideas in a much less rigid environment than is required for the formal CKM publishing activity.
This is a very challenging area, technically and 'socio-technically' where the right blend of communication and control will be essential;. We need to be able to share developing ideas quickly, rather than in isolation, before these become enshrined in actual implementation ,and therefore difficult to align. In contrast, we also need to have complete control over the exact versions archetypes, templates and termsets in our working systems , and in our design environments. This is where 'Release Sets' will become invaluable.
Any ideas would be very welcome
Ian
Dr Ian McNicoll
office / fax +44(0)141 560 4657
mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859
skype ianmcnicoll
ian.mcnicoll@oceaninformatics.com
ian@mcmi.co.ukClinical Analyst Ocean Informatics
Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, University College London
openEHR Archetype Editorial Group
Member BCS Primary Health Care SG Group
www.phcsg.org / BCS Health Scotland
On 13 July 2010 11:07, Thomas Beale
<thomas.beale@oceaninformatics.com> wrote:
On 13/07/2010 10:50, Stef Verlinden wrote:
Hi Koray,
Thanks. I missed that rule for numbering specialized nodes, so
that's covered and I realize I meant something else
By overlapping I mean, and in that case I shouldn't call it a
specialized but actually a locally extended archetype, is the
following: for example within the archetype bloodpressure I want to be
able to add more parameters than the community currently agrees on
(f.i. average home blood pressure value). For the rest I would like to
use the standard archetype because it would be silly to reinvent the
wheel twice.
So my point is, if I add these extra parameters, how do I
prevent that somewhere in the future we get overlapping AT codes with
the official/ root archetype? My suggestion is to let the AT nodes for
these extended parameters start with a codenumber of 1000 (of even
10.000) or higher...
Cheers,
Stef
Hi Stef,
the identification system proposed for archetypes and templates (see
http://www.openehr.org/svn/specification/TRUNK/publishing/architecture/am/knowledge_id_system.pdf)
in the future includes namespacing, in the same way as for software,
which ensures there is no confusion about multiple 'competing'
modifications to the same original archetype.
- thomas
_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@openehr.org
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical
_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@openehr.org
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical