Re: Term bindings in archetypes and templates
Hi Sebastien, Thanks for the comments and advice. See my brief notes below. > To allow an empty purpose there is an option in the Java Parser (one > of > the parameters when constructing the Parser). If set to true, it > should > parse these archetypes ok. > (Note that however according to the openEHR specs, the purpose must be > present and non empty) > For a missing original_author, there is no such flag, so you will need > to fix the archetypes and and add an author (e.g. using the Archetype > Editor). > (Or adapt the Parser to be more lenient) > > You need to be more specific what your problem is with the "any" > constraint. > > There will probably be other problems with the archetypes - for > example > in the way languages are expressed. > A current version of the .NET/Ocean Archetype Editor will probably > update this automatically if you load the archetype and save it again. > > I would recommend to use CKM archetypes whereever possible and add > bindings to them if necessary. > The svn archetypes are really outdated, both content-wise and > technically. > > I should add that we are preparing for terminology binding reviews > within CKM for the next release, so expect that we will add more and > more bindings at least to the published archetypes in CKM > I have sorted out the issue with 'any' single attribute constraint. I also look forward to seeing CKM archetypes with more bindings! > Term bindings can certainly added after the content of an archetype is > published in CKM - no problem and exactly what we intend to do. > Where possible, simple term bindings should be at archetype level, but > terminology subsets you would probably rather expect on template > level. > Ian or Thomas may want to add (or contradict me ;-) ) > If term bindings or constraint bindings exist in Archetypes before they are made into templates, how are the terminology subsets subsequently added to templates? Are they completely new termsets, somehow-related-to, or ontologically-subsumed-by the original ones in the associated Archetypes? Isn't it true that if binding in a template is not on the basis of subsumption, the template is not really a constrained form of the archetype... Regards Sheng This message has been scanned for content and viruses by the DIT Information Services E-Mail Scanning Service, and is believed to be clean. http://www.dit.ie _______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical@openehr.org http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical