# poor version management in archetype editor

**URL:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/poor-version-management-in-archetype-editor/14855
**Category:** Clinical (archive)
**Created:** [28 November 2008 08:38 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/poor-version-management-in-archetype-editor/14855 "2008-11-28T08:38:22Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![williamtfgoossen](https://discourse.openehr.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/w/aca169/32.png) [@williamtfgoossen](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/williamtfgoossen)
#### Post date: [8 December 2008 15:55 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/poor-version-management-in-archetype-editor/14855/21 "2008-12-08T15:55:55Z")

</div>

Sam,

Thank you for your update and thoughts. This kind of considerations is exactly why we need an ISO level standard that explains how this must be handled. DCM is the opportunity to deal with it in such a way that different standards developers are going to handle it. I agree that we should not have billions of variants of the same archetype / DCM.  
[you might consider it a sweat prevention program? 🙂]

I agree it needs to be published, why not in the ISO standard that guides the clinician’s input and sets criteria for clinical models and their meta information and their allowed linkages to use of terminologies?

Sincerely yours,

dr. William TF Goossen  
director  
Results 4 Care b.v.  
De Stinse 15  
3823 VM Amersfoort  
the Netherlands  
email: [Results4Care@cs.com](mailto:Results4Care@cs.com)  
phone + 31654614458  
fax +3133 2570169  
www.results4care.nl  
Dutch Chamber of Commerce number: 32133713

[Previous page](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/poor-version-management-in-archetype-editor/14855.md?page=1)