ADL/AOM 1.5 - id-codes unification - the final change

Thomas Beale thomas.beale at
Wed Jan 1 10:37:32 EST 2014

happy new year and best wishes for 2014. I hope your new year's day is a 
bright one (unless you live in the UK, in which case it's a lost cause 
today ;-)

I have been working in the last few months to produce a final version of 
ADL/AOM 1.5, based on:

  * existing requirements
  * emerging requirements - Intermountain, CIMI,
  * Harold Solbrig's proposals for terms-as-URIs,
  * Dave Carlson's MDHT
    <>/ AML
    work at OMG <>led by
    Robert lario,
  * general feedback on this list, particularly from David Moner's group
    at UPV, where they have implemented different rules
  * implementer feedback

I have cc:d some relevant people who are not on this list - they might 
want to consider joining 
If not, please email me and I'll post any views you have on the list, or 
else feel free to feedback on the wiki page below.

So here's the proposal. To date, We have been trying to keep ADL/AOM 1.5 
backwardly compatible at the syntax level for ADL 1.4. However, I think 
this keeps too many old problems unsolved. I propose a new approach:

  * make the central ADL/AOM 1.5 specifications as clean as possible
  * provide a series of updates to ADL 1.4, coming from the 1.5 specs,
    that are carefully designed to be applied to 1.4 tools, to bring
    them up to date
      o e.g. things like how to post-fit the new identifiers, tuple
        support, annotations, to DAL 1.4 archetype tools
  * provide rules and tooling to deal with differences between archetype
    paths, upon which querying is based
  * provide a 1.4 => 1.5 upgrade tool to completely convert existing ADL
    1.4 archetypes to the new format

The latest changes I propose (and have in fact implemented) are 
primarily about dealing properly with the long-running problem(s) of 
archetype node ids.

It's documented here on the wiki 

All comments and criticism welcome. If you think the proposal is broken 
in some way, or could be done better, don't be afraid to say so. Please 
comment on this list, or for substantive comments, the wiki page is 
probably better. Let's try and get to a final proposal that works for 
all ADL/AOM users - not just openEHR. I think that would be a real 


- thomas

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the openEHR-technical mailing list