Usage of Compositoin.Category

Thomas Beale thomas.beale at openehr.org
Fri Mar 4 03:50:15 EST 2016


Re: process, yes, it needs to be managed separately. Ian is the 
terminology component owner. But I assumed Bjørn  was talking about the 
semantics of the new term - 'Report'. Bjørn - can you elaborate on what 
Compositions would merit the 'report' Composition category?

- thomas

On 04/03/2016 08:45, Heath Frankel wrote:
>
> Hi Bjorn,
>
> How did you come up with the concept id of 434? We need to be careful 
> about assigning our own concept ids, we really need openEHR to assign 
> these, I suggest through the SEC process initiated by a Jira card.
>
> At present we have two terminology files, as you know we have agreed 
> to use the java implementation’s terminology xml file as the interim 
> standard representation but there are already concept ids allocated in 
> the Archetype Editor terminology file which existed before the 
> terminology specification and the java implementation. In this case it 
> looks like 434 is safe to use as it is not assigned to an openEHR 
> concept in the Archetype Editor, but 435 is allocated to an openEHR 
> concept in the setting group, which appears to be missing from the 
> terminology specification and the java implementation xml.
>
> Let’s start using the SEC process for managing openehr terminology 
> concepts.
>
> Regards
>
> Heath
>
> *From:*openEHR-technical 
> [mailto:openehr-technical-bounces at lists.openehr.org] *On Behalf Of 
> *Bjørn Næss
> *Sent:* Friday, 4 March 2016 6:46 PM
> *To:* For openEHR technical discussions 
> <openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org>
> *Cc:* Team Selecta <teamselecta at dips.no>
> *Subject:* SV: Usage of Compositoin.Category
>
> I just added a «composition category» on my fork of the terminology 
> project.
>
> https://github.com/bjornna/terminology/commit/600dec3058cd85f9db3e5859d6bffa7f01a45edf 
>
>
> <group name="composition category">
>
>                              <concept id="431" rubric="persistent"/>
>
>                              <concept id="433" rubric="event"/>
>
> + <concept id="434" rubric="report"/>
>
>               </group>
>
> Any comments?
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20160304/300608ca/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the openEHR-technical mailing list