# [ADL-Serialiser] C_DV_ORDINAL

**Category:** [Reference Implementation: Java (archive)](https://discourse.openehr.org/c/reference-implementation-java-archive/154)
**Created:** 2007-10-31 07:42 UTC
**Views:** 4
**Replies:** 2
**URL:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/adl-serialiser-c-dv-ordinal/14686

---

## Post #1 by @sebastian.garde

Hi

in

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 <mailto:s.garde@cqu.edu.au>
Ph: \+61 \(0\)3 9496 4040
Fax: \+61 \(0\)3 9496 4224

http://healthinformatics.cqu.edu.au
http://www.acaci.org.au

Visit the new open access electronic Journal of Health Informatics
\(eJHI\): http://ejhi.net/>

---

## Post #2 by @system

> 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)
>
> ```
> The                                                                                 
> ```
>
> ```
>
> C_DV_ORDINAL <
> ```
>
> ```
> > 
> ```

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

---

## Post #3 by @thomas.beale

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)
>
> ```
> The                                                                                 
> ```
>
> ```
> C_DV_ORDINAL <
> ```
>
> ```
> >
> ```
>
> 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

---


**Canonical:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/adl-serialiser-c-dv-ordinal/14686
**Original content:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/adl-serialiser-c-dv-ordinal/14686