Re: Run-time name constraints and appropriate use of terminologies
Hi Ian,
I was not thinking on names attribute of an archetype as holding more than names. Yet, the demographic_im.pdf is suggesting/stating to use them to associate a type meaning the the owner objects (i.e. things like PERSON/name/value = "PERSON" or ROLE/name/value = "General practitioner"), and for some objects the purpose() is designed that way as well.
As you previously said, there can be RM-types and Archetype-types and the later is introduced in demographic package through this construction of 'name' attribute. As long as the scope of that 'type' is within (or related) that owner archetype domain I don't see any problem, but if that that 'type' need used outside I don't really see it working, without a proper coding system or at least a binding.
Maybe I was not very clear in previous emails about my reasoning, maybe I am just confused about specifications or about the modeled archetypes on CKM, but nevertheless one of my main technical question remains:
how can a function like ACTOR.has_legal_identity() be implemented regardless the archetypes being used?
If you or somebody else can give some suggestion on this, I think it will be much more easier to understand the concepts behind the demographic package.
Sebastian
_______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical@openehr.org http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical