# External Package
**URL:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/external-package/15276
**Category:** Technical (archive)
**Created:** [25 March 2003 09:53 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/external-package/15276 "2003-03-25T09:53:52Z")
**Posts on this page:** 2
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@grahamegrieve](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/grahamegrieve)
#### Post date: [25 March 2003 09:53 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/external-package/15276/1 "2003-03-25T09:53:52Z")
Some questions from the External package (v0.9)
section 4.1: assumed types. This section is very brief. It's
a bit of an odd section, as important things are left
unstated (i.e. what are the expectations of whitespace for
the STRING type?) while trivial things such as cummutivity
of + are defined.
section 5.3.1, namespace. Why doesn't the valid namespace
character set include such characters as :/&+ that are
valid in URI's?
section 5.3.2 & 5.3.3: ACCESS\_GROUP\_REF and PARTY\_REF inherit
from OBJECT\_REF but this isn't stated in the tables. is there
some pattern to when things are and aren't stated in the tables?
section 5.3.5.1. There's a throwaway line at the end of the
section that archetypes can also be identified by ISO OID's.
While I hope that I never see that ;-), it's not clear from
the stated syntax how that would fit in. Nor, while we're here,
is it clear whether it's valid to use some terminology based
identification (such as LOINC for pathology archetypes)
Grahame
---
### Author:  [@thomas.beale](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/thomas.beale)
#### Post date: [26 March 2003 04:37 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/external-package/15276/2 "2003-03-26T04:37:09Z")
Grahame Grieve wrote:
> Some questions from the External package (v0.9)
>
> section 4.1: assumed types. This section is very brief. It's
> a bit of an odd section, as important things are left
> unstated (i.e. what are the expectations of whitespace for
> the STRING type?) while trivial things such as cummutivity
> of + are defined.
I don't know that anything can be said about whitespace in Strings in general, can it?
> section 5.3.1, namespace. Why doesn't the valid namespace
> character set include such characters as :/&+ that are
> valid in URI's?
this seems reasonable - I'll get it added.
> section 5.3.2 & 5.3.3: ACCESS\_GROUP\_REF and PARTY\_REF inherit
> from OBJECT\_REF but this isn't stated in the tables. is there
> some pattern to when things are and aren't stated in the tables?
this was an error that the DSTC already found.
> section 5.3.5.1. There's a throwaway line at the end of the
> section that archetypes can also be identified by ISO OID's.
> While I hope that I never see that ;-), it's not clear from
> the stated syntax how that would fit in. Nor, while we're here,
> is it clear whether it's valid to use some terminology based
> identification (such as LOINC for pathology archetypes)
I have to admit, it's not my favourite either - I don't really like OIDs but it seems everyone else does. So archetypes will have two ids: a multi-axial id and an OID (whcih may be optional - we don't know yet). The multi-axial one is defined in detail in the Support RM package 0.9.1 at [http://www.deepthought.com.au/health/openEHR/support/support\_rm\_0\_9\_1.pdf](http://www.deepthought.com.au/health/openEHR/support/support_rm_0_9_1.pdf) and I think is a more useful one.
- thomas