I would suggest that CIMI has been simiplified to the point of not being directly usable as an RM by openEHR or 13606 - most of the needed context information is gone in CIMI, and it doesn't distinguish any kind of 'Entry' or clinical statement.
Are you saying, that the context information from the reference model is not used?
This was a conscious choice in the CIMI community, designed to get buy-in from a much wider range of stakeholders than openEHR or 13606 deals with. Technically, the CIMI approach is to soft-model nearly everything in 'reference archetypes'.
and the archetypes fill in the missing reference model context parts?
If so, then this makes the two level modeling approach, of course, much more flexible, a kind of new database approach/technique, usable for virtual anything.
This sounds like an accusation (the "Sorry, I have to ask"-part). Then I don't understand the point.
How many in this community, in the past, were on this mailing-list for their school or university.?
For me, I don't care, homework or other work. We are all learning and work in the school of life.
How many in this community, in the past, were on this mailing-list for their school or university.?
For me, I don't care, homework or other work. We are all learning and work in the school of life.
See the very interesting discussion he/she initiated.
I think the suggestion of creating a wiki page based on this discussion (and updating Erik’s StackOverflow page) is worthwhile. It is question that is commonly asked and a single summary would be helpful.
the has no context information in it. that’s the idea. it makes it more flexible in one sense, but also harder for implementers - now they cannot know where even basic context like subject, times, locations etc are - all that has to be obtained from archetypes. The ‘flexibility’ comes with a price… What goes in any particular RM for some particular domain or industry needs to be the result of careful analysis of - thomas
I agree it is a balancing act in how far the semantics should be in the RM or in the archetypes.
Both ways have their pro and contra.
Thanks for explaining it