The use of CKM
bert.verhees at rosa.nl
Fri Jan 27 18:51:19 EST 2017
Hi Thomas, Now I read it back I see that my previous reply was not my.most
I try again. Is there somewhere described that archetypes should be
structured in cluster archetypes which fill slots in container entry
I see that it is done a lot in CKM, but I also see (must be) leftovers in
which the entry - archetypes contain the structures itself, and in this way
disturb the building block idea.
Like in programming languages are described paradigms, it would be good to
have that for archetypes. An advantage of formal structure descriptions
would be that discussion would become possible. Another advantage would be
that newcomers would have some directions.
So, that is why i hsve this question: are there some paradigms described
which shape new archetypes for CKM?
Op vr 27 jan. 2017 17:03 schreef Bert Verhees <bert.verhees at rosa.nl>:
> Op 27-1-2017 om 16:26 schreef Thomas Beale:
> > Hi Bert,
> > I think your statements describe things as they are today - or maybe
> > you meant something different?
> Thanks for replying
> That is nice, I must have found a leftover from the past and I did not
> find this strategy somewhere formalized.
> Is there description a formal strategy of desirable structures?
> Best regards,
> > - thomas
> > On 24/01/2017 11:33, Bert Verhees wrote:
> >> Hi
> >> I have a remark about the use of some archetypes in CKM.
> >> I think that it would be nice to have archetypes of some specific
> >> content, for example, medication, always of type cluster, and have
> >> container archetypes, for example in this case, of type action to
> >> hang them in a composition.
> >> If this was a policy, then the idea of building blocks would be much
> >> more usable.
> > _______________________________________________
> > openEHR-clinical mailing list
> > openEHR-clinical at lists.openehr.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the openEHR-clinical