I notice there are archetypes whose ids are spelled using both systems, e.g. fetal_biometry and foetal_growth. This makes life somewhat annoying for naive search tools that don’t know how to abstract away such differences. Is there a policy on standardising to a particular form of English? Terms li…

Hi Thomas! You’re right that there is some variability wrt the spelling norms used in various places in archetypes. There also isn’t a written policy on spelling norms within archetypes, although we tend to use British-like spelling in most cases (for example specialisation vs spesialization). This…

For archetypes edited by people from South America, it’s surely that won’t have the UK spelling since we mostly learn US spelling English.

US v International ENglish spelling again

Clinical Ask IEB

pablo (Pablo Pazos) 23 April 2024 23:45 2

This made me think of US-centric spec aliasing?

Topic		Replies	Views
US-centric spec aliasing? Specifications	12	603	9 November 2022
Local SNOMED CT terms in international archetypes? Clinical	6	680	25 May 2020
Specialization depth Technical (archive)	19	107	17 December 2015
ASA physical status classification system - ready for publication CKM publication archetype	7	691	17 December 2021
inconsistencies in naming of term_bindings and constraint_bindings attributes in XML-schema and PDF specs Implementers (archive)	0	7	10 November 2008
Referencing terminology in written literature - a linguistic convention Technical (archive)	0	7	14 April 2010
TERMINOLOGY_ID Implementers (archive)	7	31	9 March 2007
Layman's translations Clinical	17	1751	30 January 2021
Archetype IDs starting with a numeric? Specifications	11	822	3 March 2021
Modelling scores with multiple unit options Clinical archetype	20	976	29 September 2020

US v International ENglish spelling again

Related topics