openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 64, Issue 19

Pablo Pazos pablo.pazos at cabolabs.com
Thu Jun 15 01:59:28 EDT 2017


Not sure I understand your message. The issue is not about supporting OIDs
or not. https://openehr.atlassian.net/browse/SPECPR-219

On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 1:43 AM, William Goossen <wgoossen at results4care.nl>
wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> If openEHR wants to be really interoperable, it must have a mechanism to
> handle OIDs. Billions of specifications and standards in health informatics
> are deploying OIDS.
> Comparing them with the plague, probably in analogy with viruses and
> worms, does not help to solve issues.
> How for instance would you be able to exchange SNOMEDCT based coded data
> e.g. In an HL7 v3 CDA that is populated with archetypes and requires
> SNOMEDCT being identified with its OID. Here in the Netherlands we run
> 200.000.000 v3 messages a year through the national switchboard and minimum
> 250.000 annually for the perinatal registry.
> One single message instance contains usually between 10 and 1200 single
> data elements, each with a minimum of one OID. If openEHR wants to play
> some role in this, handle OIDs so that communication partners can
> understand you.
>
> Such decisions should be based on rational underpinnings, not on biased
> preference.
>
> Vriendelijke groet,
>
> Dr. William Goossen
>
> Directeur Results 4 Care BV
> +31654614458
>
> > Op 15 jun. 2017 om 03:18 heeft openehr-technical-request@
> lists.openehr.org het volgende geschreven:
> >
> > Send openEHR-technical mailing list submissions to
> >    openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> >    http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-
> technical_lists.openehr.org
> >
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> >    openehr-technical-request at lists.openehr.org
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> >    openehr-technical-owner at lists.openehr.org
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of openEHR-technical digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> >   1. AOM 1.4 - Archetype.uid a UUID or OID? (Thomas Beale)
> >   2. Re: AOM 1.4 - Archetype.uid a UUID or OID? (Pablo Pazos)
> >   3. RE: AOM 1.4 - Archetype.uid a UUID or OID? (Heath Frankel)
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 21:09:52 +0100
> > From: Thomas Beale <thomas.beale at openehr.org>
> > To: Openehr-Technical <openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org>
> > Subject: AOM 1.4 - Archetype.uid a UUID or OID?
> > Message-ID: <20e3c6b2-81f9-3f42-2fca-b22a5a87e790 at openehr.org>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
> >
> >
> > Bert picked up an anomaly in this PR
> > <https://openehr.atlassian.net/browse/SPECPR-219> that I think should
> > probably be fixed. ARCHETYPE.uid is of type UUID in the AOM2 spec, but
> > of type HIER_OBJECT_ID in the AOM1.4 spec (the latter type is the
> > openEHR type for OIDs). However it appears that all ADL1.4 archetypes
> > that have a uid have it as a Guid (i.e. UUID), and I assume the various
> > tools do as well. We avoid Oids like the plague in openEHR, and I am not
> > aware of them being used anywhere.
> >
> > If we can verify that everything assumes a UUID for this field, then the
> > spec is wrong, and we should update it from 1.4.2 to 1.4.3, i.e. treat
> > this as an error correction.
> >
> > Could tool makers check this issue and report here?
> >
> > thanks
> >
> > - thomas
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thomas Beale
> > Principal, Ars Semantica <http://www.arssemantica.com>
> > Consultant, ABD Team, Intermountain Healthcare
> > <https://intermountainhealthcare.org/>
> > Management Board, Specifications Program Lead, openEHR Foundation
> > <http://www.openehr.org>
> > Chartered IT Professional Fellow, BCS, British Computer Society
> > <http://www.bcs.org/category/6044>
> > Health IT blog <http://wolandscat.net/> | Culture blog
> > <http://wolandsothercat.net/>
> > -------------- next part --------------
> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_
> lists.openehr.org/attachments/20170614/fa534ee2/attachment-0001.html>
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 18:34:16 -0300
> > From: Pablo Pazos <pablo.pazos at cabolabs.com>
> > To: For openEHR technical discussions
> >    <openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org>
> > Subject: Re: AOM 1.4 - Archetype.uid a UUID or OID?
> > Message-ID:
> >    <CABzgFWpkbUfWfOCAXbxYgvepnUCzvfd0TkJDQoY88oR2-Kc1fw at mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> >
> > Never saw an OID in any tool I tested and I tested most of the open
> tools.
> > I would say UUID is the industry standard here :)
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 5:09 PM, Thomas Beale <thomas.beale at openehr.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Bert picked up an anomaly in this PR
> >> <https://openehr.atlassian.net/browse/SPECPR-219> that I think should
> >> probably be fixed. ARCHETYPE.uid is of type UUID in the AOM2 spec, but
> of
> >> type HIER_OBJECT_ID in the AOM1.4 spec (the latter type is the openEHR
> type
> >> for OIDs). However it appears that all ADL1.4 archetypes that have a uid
> >> have it as a Guid (i.e. UUID), and I assume the various tools do as
> well.
> >> We avoid Oids like the plague in openEHR, and I am not aware of them
> being
> >> used anywhere.
> >>
> >> If we can verify that everything assumes a UUID for this field, then the
> >> spec is wrong, and we should update it from 1.4.2 to 1.4.3, i.e. treat
> this
> >> as an error correction.
> >>
> >> Could tool makers check this issue and report here?
> >>
> >> thanks
> >>
> >> - thomas
> >>
> >> --
> >> Thomas Beale
> >> Principal, Ars Semantica <http://www.arssemantica.com>
> >> Consultant, ABD Team, Intermountain Healthcare
> >> <https://intermountainhealthcare.org/>
> >> Management Board, Specifications Program Lead, openEHR Foundation
> >> <http://www.openehr.org>
> >> Chartered IT Professional Fellow, BCS, British Computer Society
> >> <http://www.bcs.org/category/6044>
> >> Health IT blog <http://wolandscat.net/> | Culture blog
> >> <http://wolandsothercat.net/>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> openEHR-technical mailing list
> >> openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org
> >> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-
> >> technical_lists.openehr.org
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Ing. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez
> > Cel:(00598) 99 043 145
> > Skype: cabolabs
> > <http://cabolabs.com/>
> > http://www.cabolabs.com
> > pablo.pazos at cabolabs.com
> > Subscribe to our newsletter <http://eepurl.com/b_w_tj>
> > -------------- next part --------------
> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_
> lists.openehr.org/attachments/20170614/b2f3996a/attachment-0001.html>
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 3
> > Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 01:17:37 +0000
> > From: Heath Frankel <heath.frankel at oceanhealthsystems.com>
> > To: For openEHR technical discussions
> >    <openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org>
> > Subject: RE: AOM 1.4 - Archetype.uid a UUID or OID?
> > Message-ID:
> >    <SYXPR01MB145562D7CD4EF515A66439689EC00 at SYXPR01MB1455.
> ausprd01.prod.outlook.com>
> >
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> >
> > Hi Thomas,
> > Your statement that the use of HIER_OBJECT_ID in the AOM1.4 spec is used
> for OIDs is incorrect. HIER_OBJECT_ID is a complex type with a value
> attribute of type UID, which may be either UUID, ISO_OID or INTERNET_ID.
> >
> > The bigger issue is the HIER_OBJECT_ID is incompatible with UUID from a
> XML schema perspective as UUID is a simple type with a restricted string
> value while HIER_OBJECT_ID is a complex type with a child element value.
> The V1.4 AOM XML schema uses this HIER_OBJECT_ID type (as per the AOM
> specification) and since the OPT schema inherits this model, it also uses
> this type and all OPTs generated by CKM (and the template designer)
> populate the uid element with the template GUID specified in the OET file.
> >
> > I suggest that the ADL 2 specification is that one that needs to change
> or there needs to be a specified mapping between the two.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Heath
> >
> > From: openEHR-technical [mailto:openehr-technical-
> bounces at lists.openehr.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Beale
> > Sent: Thursday, 15 June 2017 5:40 AM
> > To: Openehr-Technical <openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org>
> > Subject: AOM 1.4 - Archetype.uid a UUID or OID?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Bert picked up an anomaly in this PR<https://openehr.atlassian.
> net/browse/SPECPR-219> that I think should probably be fixed.
> ARCHETYPE.uid is of type UUID in the AOM2 spec, but of type HIER_OBJECT_ID
> in the AOM1.4 spec (the latter type is the openEHR type for OIDs). However
> it appears that all ADL1.4 archetypes that have a uid have it as a Guid
> (i.e. UUID), and I assume the various tools do as well. We avoid Oids like
> the plague in openEHR, and I am not aware of them being used anywhere.
> >
> > If we can verify that everything assumes a UUID for this field, then the
> spec is wrong, and we should update it from 1.4.2 to 1.4.3, i.e. treat this
> as an error correction.
> >
> > Could tool makers check this issue and report here?
> >
> > thanks
> >
> > - thomas
> >
> > --
> > Thomas Beale
> > Principal, Ars Semantica<http://www.arssemantica.com>
> > Consultant, ABD Team, Intermountain Healthcare<https://
> intermountainhealthcare.org/>
> > Management Board, Specifications Program Lead, openEHR Foundation<
> http://www.openehr.org>
> > Chartered IT Professional Fellow, BCS, British Computer Society<
> http://www.bcs.org/category/6044>
> > Health IT blog<http://wolandscat.net/> | Culture blog<
> http://wolandsothercat.net/>
> > -------------- next part --------------
> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_
> lists.openehr.org/attachments/20170615/9303fb2a/attachment.html>
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Subject: Digest Footer
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > openEHR-technical mailing list
> > openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org
> > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-
> technical_lists.openehr.org
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > End of openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 64, Issue 19
> > *************************************************
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-
> technical_lists.openehr.org
>



-- 
Ing. Pablo Pazos Gutiérrez
Cel:(00598) 99 043 145
Skype: cabolabs
<http://cabolabs.com/>
http://www.cabolabs.com
pablo.pazos at cabolabs.com
Subscribe to our newsletter <http://eepurl.com/b_w_tj>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20170615/cb3ce40c/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the openEHR-technical mailing list