# Archetype Editors

**URL:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/archetype-editors/14649
**Category:** Implementers (archive)
**Created:** [6 April 2007 12:07 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/archetype-editors/14649 "2007-04-06T12:07:58Z")
**Posts on this page:** 5
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![system](https://discourse.openehr.org/uploads/default/original/2X/f/f0a1dedb20c42747bddcafd6c7df9db5f34f003c.svg) [@system](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/system)
#### Post date: [6 April 2007 12:07 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/archetype-editors/14649/1 "2007-04-06T12:07:58Z")

</div>

I must say, good news, it is possible to work with the  
Archetype-editors, although there still are some quirks.

I like the Swedisch ArcehtypeEditor because of the (kind of) debugging  
facility  
And I like the Workbench,b ecause it gives a lot of flexibility.

It is too bad, that both do not seem to have (completely) the same  
syntax-ideas, although, they match for over 99%.

I found some problems:

The Swedish editor does not want  
language  
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;original\_language = \<[ISO\_639-1::en]\>  
and  
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;language = \<[ISO\_639-1::en]\>

in the header part, and  
it wants to add

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;primary\_language = \<"en"\>  
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;languages\_available = \<"en", ...\>

in the ontology part, for the rest, they sem both to accept the same syntax

Just wanted to say that, good editors are very important. And good error  
ahndling is very nice, don't shoot the archetype because of a small  
error, try to be tolerant. (it asks a lot of programmers.)

There is another problem with the workbench, it "takes" without my  
permission, the ADL-file-extension, and then fails to start if I  
doubleclick on an ADL-file, with message:  
Cannot run: 'icons' directory missing  
Hit any key to exit application

I must regret, the Ocean ArchetypoEditor fails to open an Archetype  
which opens without problem in the Workbench.  
I also does not handle the error, but generates an Exception and remains  
after that in an undefined condition.

The exception text, and debug trace is (maybe this helps to tackle the  
problem)

(in between, I say, there is much improvement, which is very helpful for  
my work)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![Mattias\_Forss1](https://discourse.openehr.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/e9c0ed/32.png) [@Mattias\_Forss1](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/Mattias_Forss1)
#### Post date: [6 April 2007 13:22 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/archetype-editors/14649/2 "2007-04-06T13:22:41Z")

</div>

Hi Bert,

Thanks for your comments. I think I must update the ADLSerializer  
component so it doesn't output the language attributes in the ontology  
section. Could you provide an example ADL which contains a language  
section that fails to open? I guess the ADL parser expects another  
kind of syntax or something (Rong?). Are you using the latest version  
of the LiU Archetype Editor?

That's all I have for the moment. I will get back to these issues when  
I return from my vacation in France.

Regards,

Mattias

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![system](https://discourse.openehr.org/uploads/default/original/2X/f/f0a1dedb20c42747bddcafd6c7df9db5f34f003c.svg) [@system](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/system)
#### Post date: [6 April 2007 13:37 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/archetype-editors/14649/3 "2007-04-06T13:37:14Z")

</div>

Mattias Forss schreef:

> Hi Bert,
> 
> Thanks for your comments. I think I must update the ADLSerializer  
> component so it doesn't output the language attributes in the ontology  
> section. Could you provide an example ADL which contains a language  
> section that fails to open? I guess the ADL parser expects another  
> kind of syntax or something (Rong?). Are you using the latest version  
> of the LiU Archetype Editor?
> 
> That's all I have for the moment. I will get back to these issues when  
> I return from my vacation in France.  
> &nbsp;&nbsp;

Ah, la vie en rose!!  
I am using 0.5.1 (I believe this is the latest version?)

I constructed an archetype by myself, or rebuild an old one, because I  
needed it for testing purposes.

I send it later today to your email, because I don't know if the  
mailinglist accepts attachements, which mostly is not.

Bert

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![erik.sundvall](https://discourse.openehr.org/user_avatar/discourse.openehr.org/erik.sundvall/32/1961_2.png) [@erik.sundvall](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/erik.sundvall)
#### Post date: [6 April 2007 14:55 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/archetype-editors/14649/4 "2007-04-06T14:55:44Z")

</div>

The latest version is 0.5.2. see :[http://www.imt.liu.se/mi/ehr/](http://www.imt.liu.se/mi/ehr/)

A lot of parsing/serialising changes were done since 0.5.2.  
Could you please check how many of the problems remain in 0.5.2 and report back?

Best regards,  
Erik Sundvall  
[http://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/](http://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![system](https://discourse.openehr.org/uploads/default/original/2X/f/f0a1dedb20c42747bddcafd6c7df9db5f34f003c.svg) [@system](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/system)
#### Post date: [6 April 2007 15:19 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/archetype-editors/14649/5 "2007-04-06T15:19:49Z")

</div>

Erik Sundvall schreef:

> &nbsp;&nbsp;
> 
> > I am using 0.5.1 (I believe this is the latest version?)  
> > &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;  
> > The latest version is 0.5.2. see :[http://www.imt.liu.se/mi/ehr/](http://www.imt.liu.se/mi/ehr/)
> 
> A lot of parsing/serialising changes were done since 0.5.2.  
> Could you please check how many of the problems remain in 0.5.2 and report back?  
> &nbsp;&nbsp;

The problems seem to be gone. But there is another thing, that happens  
occasionally, and I don't know what it means, it is the error message:  
"No valid structure '18' for type name 'SECTION'!"

Maybe there is an error in the ADL-file, it ispossible, but the  
errormessage is hard to understand

Bert
