I have a project that needs some certainty with regards
the XML schema for 1.0.1. Are they considered part of
the 1.0.1 release or are they on a different schedule?
I still have some blocking issues with the current versions in
subversion
Composition.xsd -> COMPOSITION no longer is an
extension of LOCATABLE. I think this must be a typo?
Archetype.xsd -> ARCHETYPE_ONTOLOGY is
inadequate to store the ontology data that can be
expressed in ADL. Even if term_codes is changed to
a List<ARCHETYPE_TERM>, I still don't see how it
can store all the ADL data (multiple term codes for
different languages?).
Archetype.xsd -> there have been some substantial
changes to this over the last few weeks (adding in
AUTHORED_RESOURCE etc). The archetype tools
need to be updated to output XML that meets this
schema. Currently, the XML samples in the archetype
repository need to be substantially edited to make them
validate.
Interval Stuff -> we need to agree on the unified form
for IntervalOfInteger etc (and DV_INTERVAL), including
documenting semantics that can't be captured by XSD.
I think the current schema is probably correct - but
just needs unification between DV_INTERVAL and the
others.
Andrew
Hi Andrew (and others),
These issues should be solved as soon as possible. Also, the archetype tools (especially the LiU editor which outputs really old XML) should be updated to output valid XML.
If someone is good at JAXB (Java XML binding) I could need a hand to get the XMLSerializer component output XML which validates against the Archetype schema and also to make a new component (XML parser) which parses XML into some object tree created by JAXB from the Archetype schema… The ideal would however be to make JAXB instansiate objects directly from the AOM, but I don’t know if that is possible with the current immutable state for the AOM classes…
Regards,
Mattias
2007/4/21, Andrew Patterson <andrewpatto@gmail.com>:
Dear all,
unfortunately we noticed these errors after making the Release 1.0.1
tag. The errors were partly due to a miscommunication on my part to the
schema writers about how to encode he archetype schema, caused by the
current interface-style specification of the ARCHETYPE_ONTOLOGY class.
Corrected schemas are now posted in the TRUNK area of the repository - see:
* schemas: http://svn.openehr.org/specification/TRUNK/ITS/XML-schema/
* documentation:
http://svn.openehr.org/specification/TRUNK/publishing/its/XML-schema/index.html
I think it would be appropriate to add these to the Tagged Release
1.0.1, even though this is officially incorrect practice for version
management. However, I think it will be less confusing for users to get
the schemas in the 1.0.1 tag area that actually do correspond to the
reference model there - particularly the archetype schema, which can't
work in its previous form.
If there is ageement here, I will add these corrected schemas and
documentation into the TAGS/Release-1.0.1 area as well.
- thomas beale
Mattias Forss wrote:
If there is ageement here, I will add these corrected schemas and
documentation into the TAGS/Release-1.0.1 area as well.
I agree that it is not ideal, but the schemas in the tagged release
are fundamentally broken so I don't think it is satisfactory to leave
them in that state. I vote for making the update on the tagged
release.
Andrew