# \[ADL-Serialiser\] C\_DV\_ORDINAL
**URL:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/adl-serialiser-c-dv-ordinal/14686
**Category:** Reference Implementation: Java (archive)
**Created:** [31 October 2007 07:42 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/adl-serialiser-c-dv-ordinal/14686 "2007-10-31T07:42:02Z")
**Posts on this page:** 3
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@sebastian.garde](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/sebastian.garde)
#### Post date: [31 October 2007 07:42 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/adl-serialiser-c-dv-ordinal/14686/1 "2007-10-31T07:42:02Z")
Hi
in
[http://svn.openehr.org/knowledge/archetypes/dev/adl/openehr/ehr/entry/ob](http://svn.openehr.org/knowledge/archetypes/dev/adl/openehr/ehr/entry/ob)
servation/openEHR-EHR-OBSERVATION.pre\_operative.v1draft.adl
The
C\_DV\_ORDINAL \<
>
in Element[at0005]
is that legal ADL?
If yes - the ADL-Serialiser needs to be updated as it causes a null
pointer exception (I could probably do this)
if not - could or should that archetype be fixed?
Cheers
Sebastian
Dr Sebastian Garde
Dr. sc. hum., Dipl.-Inform. Med, FACHI
Faculty of Business and Informatics, Central Queensland University
Austin Centre for Applied Clinical Informatics, Austin Health
Heidelberg Vic 3084, Australia
s.garde@cqu.edu.au \
Ph: +61 (0)3 9496 4040
Fax: +61 (0)3 9496 4224
[http://healthinformatics.cqu.edu.au](http://healthinformatics.cqu.edu.au)
[http://www.acaci.org.au](http://www.acaci.org.au)
Visit the new open access electronic Journal of Health Informatics
(eJHI): [http://ejhi.net/>](http://ejhi.net/>);
---
### Author:  [@system](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/system)
#### Post date: [31 October 2007 08:33 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/adl-serialiser-c-dv-ordinal/14686/2 "2007-10-31T08:33:08Z")
> Hi
>
> in
>
> [http://svn.openehr.org/knowledge/archetypes/dev/adl/openehr/ehr/entry/observation/openEHR-EHR-OBSERVATION.pre\_operative.v1draft.adl](http://svn.openehr.org/knowledge/archetypes/dev/adl/openehr/ehr/entry/observation/openEHR-EHR-OBSERVATION.pre_operative.v1draft.adl)
>
> ```auto
> The
>
> ```
>
> ```auto
>
> C_DV_ORDINAL <
>
> ```
>
> ```auto
> >
>
> ```
Hi Sebastian,
This seems to be valid according to the C\_DV\_ORDINAL class definition from openEHR Archetype Profile. It means a CDvOrdinal object without any specific constraint (anyAllowed=true). The adl-parser can already handle this.
> in Element[at0005]
>
> is that legal ADL?
>
> If yes - the ADL-Serialiser needs to be updated as it causes a null pointer exception (I could probably do this)
Yes, I think the adl-serializer needs to be updated. It will be great if you can do it.
Cheers,
Rong
---
### Author:  [@thomas.beale](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/thomas.beale)
#### Post date: [31 October 2007 09:38 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/adl-serialiser-c-dv-ordinal/14686/3 "2007-10-31T09:38:09Z")
Sebastian Garde wrote:
> Hi
>
> in
>
> [http://svn.openehr.org/knowledge/archetypes/dev/adl/openehr/ehr/entry/observation/openEHR-EHR-OBSERVATION.pre\_operative.v1draft.adl](http://svn.openehr.org/knowledge/archetypes/dev/adl/openehr/ehr/entry/observation/openEHR-EHR-OBSERVATION.pre_operative.v1draft.adl)
>
> ```auto
> The
>
> ```
>
> ```auto
> C_DV_ORDINAL <
>
> ```
>
> ```auto
> >
>
> ```
>
> in Element[at0005]
>
> is that legal ADL?
it is: it is the dADL way of saying that the object is of type DV\_ORDINAL, without making any further constraint.
- thomas