# ADL1.4 Grammars - possible defect

**Category:** [Implementation](https://discourse.openehr.org/c/implem/39)
**Created:** 2023-04-14 21:47 UTC
**Views:** 357
**Replies:** 2
**URL:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/adl1-4-grammars-possible-defect/3845

---

## Post #1 by @richard.kavanagh

More questions regarding the grammar files for ADL1.4 (and possibly ADL2.0)
Looking at the ADL 1.4 documentation the high level structure is shown to be as below

![image|374x500](upload://7a8qQRVk8R0hhvyU8Ah2KdJYTP1.png)

My questions revolve around the 'revision_history' section at the end.

In the grammar files at :  https://github.com/openEHR/adl-antlr/blob/master/src/main/antlr/adl/adl14.g4 

The high-level structure for the grammar is as follows - there is no revision_history component.

![image|332x221](upload://1Lm2nSsdJ5bIqqurK4PX9tF9hwY.png)

Looking further at the candidate consolidated grammars at https://github.com/openEHR/openEHR-antlr4/blob/a45627017b589ea2b1b420e3f8a4d3fd45c49491/combined/src/main/antlr/Adl14Lexer.g4#L116

there appears to be a mix up with ADL2.0 as the 'annotations' component has been included, which is introduced in ADL2.0 as per 

![image|387x500](upload://wPaojFwMMhxDf1htkpFza3qhpbY.png)

So a couple of questions?

* is the revision_history expected in ADL1.4 (can't say I have ever seen it)? Why is it not present in the grammar files.
* is the inclusion of the 'annotations' section in the 'combined' grammar an error? If not how does it align to the specification.

Thanks...

---

## Post #2 by @thomas.beale

Hi Richard,
thanks for the close reading once again!

Revision history is not used in any ADL and is nt AFAIK supported in any tools. It was an old idea of mine that we got rid of years ago, but appears to be still visible in the parts of the spec you have noted.

Annotations is used in ADL2, but I don't think ADL1.4, but might be wrong.

The SEC is checking this, and will generate appropriate change request(s) to fix it.

BTW you can always raise a [Jira Problem Report (PR)](https://openehr.atlassian.net/jira/software/c/projects/SPECPR/issues/?filter=allissues) rather than report here (just means we will never miss the issue).

---

## Post #3 by @richard.kavanagh

Thanks @thomas.beale looking closely at ADL 1.4 there seem to be a few places where adoption/thinking moved on. I'm looking at the documentation and also the actual archetypes to see what is actually used in the tools today. I appreciate ADL 2 is just around the corner so assume things are tidier there.

Building tools makes you look closer at the specs, it's a great way (for me) to get to understand some of the detail.

---


**Canonical:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/adl1-4-grammars-possible-defect/3845
**Original content:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/adl1-4-grammars-possible-defect/3845