# OPT annotations inconsistencies
**Category:** [Tools](https://discourse.openehr.org/c/tool-dev/36)
**Created:** 2020-07-30 16:28 UTC
**Views:** 792
**Replies:** 6
**URL:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/opt-annotations-inconsistencies/901
---
## Post #1 by @pablo
Hi all,
I was checking some OPT samples I have, that were generated using different modeling tools.
Here you can see items contains a text node, while in the second example items contains a value element that contains a text node:
Example 1:
PFA53
Example 2:
For use ONLY if structured data is not available
I'm not sure if we agreed on a "valid" OPT1.4 XML Schema, and I'm trying to adapt the XSD that I have to comply with this, so which one of those is the valid one? :)
---
## Post #2 by @ian.mcnicoll
I vote (1) - I suspect (2) was generated by a version of Template Designer that inadvertantly introduced a breaking change.
---
## Post #3 by @pablo
I think so, but its difficult to know which one is correct having samples coming from different places and form different tools :)
It makes it more complex to keep everyone happy :P
As you know, I did some changes trying to comply with some modifications done by tolling to the original OPT schema, here is my current XSD https://github.com/ppazos/cabolabs-ehrserver/blob/master/src/main/webapp/xsd/OperationalTemplateExtra.xsd (that contains the value node inside items). I believe that was added from one sample you provided hehe.
---
## Post #4 by @ian.mcnicoll
[quote="pablo, post:3, topic:901"]
I believe that was added from one sample you provided hehe.
[/quote]
Oops. Just t oupset you more, here is what happens when you pull through annotations in archetypes (in CKM).
```
OBX.3
Observation.code
```
In AD this is
```
me
openEHR,FHIR
```
and Template Designer 2.8 is
```
testing
```
So I think we have consensus!! Forget the value node.
---
## Post #5 by @pablo
Thanks Ian. FYI, I got this eReferral OPT which has the value in the annotation, not sure which editor was used to generate it:
[e5f533a2_7480_4b53_91f6_9b83433f36ab.en.v1.opt|attachment](upload://uKy3QYMCnn1iRhiXkopildVvdBl.opt) (687.2 KB)
---
## Post #6 by @ian.mcnicoll
This is really old template which should probably be deprecated.
---
## Post #7 by @pablo
Gotcha, thinking about all the source we could have for authoring OPTs, and knowing there are differences that are currently unmanaged and unmanageable, I would like to suggest to add some kind of metadata to the OPTs that is mandatory and states which tolling and version was used to generate it. I know the TD adds come comment on the top, but I think should be in a header node of the OPT that can be read by apps.
---
**Canonical:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/opt-annotations-inconsistencies/901
**Original content:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/opt-annotations-inconsistencies/901