# openEHR-implementers Digest, Vol 32, Issue 13
**URL:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/openehr-implementers-digest-vol-32-issue-13/14927
**Category:** Implementers (archive)
**Created:** [15 August 2009 12:15 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/openehr-implementers-digest-vol-32-issue-13/14927 "2009-08-15T12:15:35Z")
**Posts on this page:** 4
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Greg\_Caulton](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/Greg_Caulton)
#### Post date: [15 August 2009 12:15 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/openehr-implementers-digest-vol-32-issue-13/14927/1 "2009-08-15T12:15:35Z")
> Hi Greg,
>
> The Answers you seek are in understanding of the overview and of the
> reference model. Without them; archetypes have no meaning.
>
> –Tim
>
> > I agree that extract is a dull word.
> >
> > The problem we still seem to be missing key pieces. The xml e.g.
> >
> > [http://www.openehr.org/svn/ref\_impl\_java/SANDBOX/ehr-bank/src/res/xml/blood-glucose-sample.xml](http://www.openehr.org/svn/ref_impl_java/SANDBOX/ehr-bank/src/res/xml/blood-glucose-sample.xml)
> >
> > does not seem to have any patient identifiers. Without the basic
> > functionality of being able to even match a patient its hard to get
> > the data into the system in the first place. I have several questions
> > around the archetype identifiers when we get there.
> >
> > I think we need a simple step by step test case which walks through
> > the process and identifies what data is being sent where. The actual
> > protocols are not important but the content and how patients, visits
> > and clinical content is _matched_ is important.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed…
> Name: not available
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 197 bytes
> Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
> Url : [http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/private/openehr-implementers/attachments/20090814/8a4721e7/attachment-0001.bin](http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/private/openehr-implementers/attachments/20090814/8a4721e7/attachment-0001.bin)
>
> * * *
>
> * * *
>
> openEHR-implementers mailing list
> [openEHR-implementers@openehr.org](mailto:openEHR-implementers@openehr.org)
> [http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-implementers](http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-implementers)
>
> End of openEHR-implementers Digest, Vol 32, Issue 13
>
> * * *
Read the manual replies are not helpful.
If it is only possible to exchange extracts with full blown ‘OpenEHR designed’ systems then extracts are not helpful.
It would be sad if all this engineering behind OpenEHR of which you promote interoperability, can only exchange data with itself.
---
### Author:  [@Tim\_Cook2](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/Tim_Cook2)
#### Post date: [15 August 2009 14:44 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/openehr-implementers-digest-vol-32-issue-13/14927/2 "2009-08-15T14:44:36Z")
> Read the manual replies are not helpful.
Why not?
> If it is only possible to exchange extracts with full blown 'OpenEHR
> designed' systems then extracts are not helpful.
>
> It would be sad if all this engineering behind OpenEHR of which you
> promote interoperability, can only exchange data with itself.
No; you're "wagging the dog". If you read the manuals and talked to
people like Ocean Informatics you'll discover that they exchange
information via a variety of formats.
It just happens that if you are claiming to have an openEHR compliant
system then an openEHR extract is the most semantically correct/robust
approach.
--Tim
---
### Author:  [@Greg\_Caulton](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/Greg_Caulton)
#### Post date: [15 August 2009 21:36 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/openehr-implementers-digest-vol-32-issue-13/14927/3 "2009-08-15T21:36:25Z")
```auto
> If it is only possible to exchange extracts with full blown 'OpenEHR
> designed' systems then extracts are not helpful.
>
> It would be sad if all this engineering behind OpenEHR of which you
> promote interoperability, can only exchange data with itself.
>
> No; you're "wagging the dog". If you read the manuals and talked to
> people like Ocean Informatics you'll discover that they exchange
> information via a variety of formats.
Yes the Ocean group are actually friendly and helpful.
> It just happens that if you are claiming to have an openEHR compliant
> system then an openEHR extract is the most semantically correct/robust
> approach.
No, not our goal for many reasons, a common semantic data model (that is data not schema...) with the ability to exchange content would be fine.
```
---
### Author:  [@thomas.beale](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/thomas.beale)
#### Post date: [16 August 2009 11:32 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/openehr-implementers-digest-vol-32-issue-13/14927/4 "2009-08-16T11:32:17Z")
Greg Caulton wrote: