# Serialisation of openEHR Models
**URL:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/serialisation-of-openehr-models/15094
**Category:** Clinical (archive)
**Created:** [6 November 2011 21:56 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/serialisation-of-openehr-models/15094 "2011-11-06T21:56:49Z")
**Posts on this page:** 12
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@system](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/system)
#### Post date: [6 November 2011 21:56 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/serialisation-of-openehr-models/15094/1 "2011-11-06T21:56:49Z")
Hi Diego
You asked:
_I am curious about this sentence:_
_“Serialisation of openEHR models can be used to support CDA, greenCDA and other messaging formats”._
_what do you mean for ‘serialisation of openEHR models’?_
Well, it is necessary to combine the archetypes and reference model to get a full statement of what is possible. It is this combination that is required for the transformation to other formats. This includes knowing how document management or participation is handled. Although the combination is available in memory, the transformation is normally done on a serialisation of openEHR data such as that conformant with the openEHR XML Schema or Template XML Schema.
Cheers, Sam
> **(attachments)**
>
> 
---
### Author:  [@yampeku](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/yampeku)
#### Post date: [6 November 2011 22:16 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/serialisation-of-openehr-models/15094/2 "2011-11-06T22:16:03Z")
Hi Sam,
I understand it now. I just was wondering if the transformation part was supposed to be there or you were just stating the possibility to express others models as ADL (a possible serialization of openEHR)
Regards
2011/11/6 Sam Heard \<[sam.heard@oceaninformatics.com](mailto:sam.heard@oceaninformatics.com)\>
> **(attachments)**
>
> 
---
### Author:  [@thomas.beale](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/thomas.beale)
#### Post date: [7 November 2011 10:40 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/serialisation-of-openehr-models/15094/3 "2011-11-07T10:40:25Z")
Diego,
I don't think ADL is likely to be used as a serialisation of openEHR
data - only of openEHR archetypes, templates etc. But many (most?) users
doing that will use the XML serialisation instead. Could ADL be used for
more purposes? Quite probably, but like any abstract syntax, it needs
its own parser. XML-based serialisations can use normal XML parsers and,
if properly defined, they can be used to turn a document straight into
in-memory objects.
- thomas
---
### Author:  [@yampeku](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/yampeku)
#### Post date: [7 November 2011 10:49 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/serialisation-of-openehr-models/15094/4 "2011-11-07T10:49:40Z")
I am talking about model serialization: use ADL to express CDA and greenCDA (over their own model) as we do with openEHR ADL archetypes
2011/11/7 Thomas Beale \<[thomas.beale@oceaninformatics.com](mailto:thomas.beale@oceaninformatics.com)\>
---
### Author:  [@thomas.beale](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/thomas.beale)
#### Post date: [7 November 2011 11:10 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/serialisation-of-openehr-models/15094/5 "2011-11-07T11:10:55Z")
well ADL is designed to serialise any 2nd or higher order model based on
any RM. So creating an archetype based on a CDA RM can be done. I first
built HL7-based archetypes in 2003, but HL7 were not interested.
- thomas
---
### Author:  [@pablo](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/pablo)
#### Post date: [7 November 2011 13:54 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/serialisation-of-openehr-models/15094/6 "2011-11-07T13:54:50Z")
Last week I attended to an Ed Hammond’s talk in Argentina, and in his presentation he mention a new concept to reach true interoperability: the data element.
Please see page 13-14: [http://www.hospitalitaliano.org.ar/archivos/noticias\_archivos/11/Jornadas2011/11\_11.01-03-Hammond-Interoperability-BuenosAires.pdf](http://www.hospitalitaliano.org.ar/archivos/noticias_archivos/11/Jornadas2011/11_11.01-03-Hammond-Interoperability-BuenosAires.pdf)
I asked him why this sounds so much like openEHR archetypes and why don’t reuse this concept instead of creating a new one (or at least renaming it). He told me “everyone want his own standard”, that was very sad.
Besides that, what I see (and many people on that room that know what is an archetype) is a validation of an important figure on HL7 that archetypes work, do the job, and are necessary for interoperability. So, I think HL7 is very interested on archetypes right now.
I hope that soon Mr. Hammond could do a presentation on standarization that show the best of the breed instead of reinventing/renaming the wheel.
---
### Author:  [@system](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/system)
#### Post date: [7 November 2011 14:25 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/serialisation-of-openehr-models/15094/7 "2011-11-07T14:25:28Z")
It remains to be seen how long the industry and governments will still invest in a new initiative of HL7 after their badly experience with V3.
---
### Author:  [@thomas.beale](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/thomas.beale)
#### Post date: [7 November 2011 15:50 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/serialisation-of-openehr-models/15094/8 "2011-11-07T15:50:42Z")
With all respect to Ed (and he deserves a great deal), if in sentences like the one you quoted above you replace ‘everyone’ with ‘HL7’, the situation today starts to make more sense.
- thomas
---
### Author:  [@pablo](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/pablo)
#### Post date: [7 November 2011 19:12 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/serialisation-of-openehr-models/15094/9 "2011-11-07T19:12:31Z")
I still want to see the glass of water half full: this is in fact a validation and the recognition of an emblematic member of HL7 that the openEHR approach is useful and needed to reach true interoperability, the name (archetype, data element, …) is not the important part, neither who invented it first, but the use of the same concept is the key.
---
### Author:  [@system](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/system)
#### Post date: [7 November 2011 20:12 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/serialisation-of-openehr-models/15094/10 "2011-11-07T20:12:08Z")
Pablo,
Ed Hammond is on this list, I think he´s always recognized the value of clinical model and archetypes, but hasn´t fully acknowledged OpenEHR approach. HL7 has been trying to develop their own DCM and presently, as Sam reported on this list, there´s an initiative led by Stan Huff, a former HL7 chair to harmonize the formalism to model clinical content. What I meant is that there´s already 18 years of hard work in this community and I do hope HL7 use it and not try to build from scratch. Would be a complete waste of time and money. I think, both communities can be useful to one another and, here in Brazil, we´re definitely trying to work together to have a single coherent multilevel approach where both OpenEHR and HL7 play an important role. If you prefer to see the half full glass I prefer to believe that there´s place for everyone in this world.
Jussara Rötzsch
---
### Author:  [@Koray\_Atalag](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/Koray_Atalag)
#### Post date: [14 November 2011 12:02 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/serialisation-of-openehr-models/15094/11 "2011-11-14T12:02:07Z")
Further to reinventing Archetypes etc. the HSSP (a joint initiative of OMG and HL7) has come up with their own concept of an Archetype called ‘semantic signifier’ 😉
The more I get into standards biz the more I feel like losing my faith in health IT! I wish people (and organisations), beyond their egos, could really see real lives saved or lost as a result of eHealth environment which we are all trying to create. But…that’s life – isn’t it?
Cheers,
-koray
---
### Author:  [@ian.mcnicoll](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/ian.mcnicoll)
#### Post date: [14 November 2011 12:59 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/serialisation-of-openehr-models/15094/12 "2011-11-14T12:59:44Z")
Hi Koray,
Thanks for the pointer. Thomas or Sam will no more but Ocean
Informatics appears ot have contributed to the OMG document and my
reading of RLUS is that it is working at a higher conceptual level i.e
openEHR data is one flavour of semantic signifier amongst others e.g
HL7 templates.
What is interesting is that a brief read of the OMG document makes me
think that it is exactly the kind of service definition that we will
need for global openEHR resource locators if and when we have
federated archetype/template/termset repositories, although in this
case we are looking at the archetype, rather than archetype-based
heath records.
An alternative apporach might be to build on the IHE XDS work (or am I
barking up the wrong tree!!).
Third daft idea of the day - can we make use of AQL to do fine-grained
querying of openEHR repositories?
Ian
Dr Ian McNicoll
office +44 (0)1536 414 994
fax +44 (0)1536 516317
mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859
skype ianmcnicoll
ian.mcnicoll@oceaninformatics.com
Clinical Modelling Consultant, Ocean Informatics, UK
Director/Clinical Knowledge Editor openEHR Foundation www.openehr.org/knowledge
Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL
BCS Primary Health Care www.phcsg.org