# 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