# Msg#5 - Software Archetypes - single vs double systems

**Category:** [Technical (archive)](https://discourse.openehr.org/c/technical-archive/156)
**Created:** 2006-04-10 17:52 UTC
**Views:** 3
**Replies:** 0
**URL:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/msg-5-software-archetypes-single-vs-double-systems/15841

---

## Post #1 by @Bill_Walton

systems

> Hi Greg,
>
> Greg Woodhouse wrote:
>
> > What I find most frustrating about discussion of
> > archetypes is that it is so often vague and intuitive
> > in nature, making it rather hard to decipher\.
>
> I didn't know what level of detail was desired\.  Also, I'm not an expert

on
> archetypes and, as you'll see below, have no intention of putting myself
> forward as such\.  Just thought I'd provide what information I could\.  I
> didn't mean to frustrate, nor to offend\.  Sorry if I did\.
>
> >
> > > Archetypes provide a capability that's very familiar to programmers,
> > > but take it to the next level\.  At the most basic level, it's about
> > > decoupling\.
> <snip>
> > > Archetypes \(which I believe do not depend on an RDBMS
> > > implementation\) provide a similar capability, but take it to the

domain
> level\.
> >
> > By domain do you mean application domain?
>
> Not sure exactly what you mean by "application\."   It may be too

low\-level\.
> I think of 'domain' as a place where we can, in general, use the same

words
> without having to worry about being misunderstood\.  So, domain as in
> "domain\-specific set of concepts" like medicine or aerospace\.  Weight, for
> example, is a fairly unambiguous term in medicine, requiring at most I'd
> think, a qualifier for unit of measure\.  That's because there's an

implicit
> assumption: the domain is "medicine as practiced on the planet Earth\."

For
> aerospace folks, however, you might need to provide additional information
> about mass and gravitational field to get to a similar level of \(lack of\)
> ambiguity\.
>
> <snip>
>
> > >
> > > When working with an archetype\-enabled system, programs / programmers
> > > work directly with domain concepts like blood pressure or height or
> > > weight\.  The underlying data is stored / accessed through the
> > > archetype\.
> >
> > But what does this mean?
>
> As suggested by your sig, I'll forward your email to the experts and get
> back to you with their response\(s\)\.
>
> Best regards,
> Bill
>
> \-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-
> This SF\.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting

language
> that extends applications into web and mobile media\. Attend the live

webcast
> and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding

territory\!

---


**Canonical:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/msg-5-software-archetypes-single-vs-double-systems/15841
**Original content:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/msg-5-software-archetypes-single-vs-double-systems/15841