dhis2-devs team mailing list archive

[Bob Jolliffe <bobjolliffe@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Murod

Do you have an example of the XML you are using?  I want to see how far it
might be from the DXF we are already using, should it be incorporated or
what ... I remember seeing a small snippet but would be good to share a file
or two.

Regards
Bob

2009/8/3 Murodullo Latifov <murodlatifov@xxxxxxxxx>

> Hi,
>
>
>> Discussion was mainly around IXF/DXF standards for representing data,
>> which I ignored on my initial implementation, and likely will do so for now.
>> I am concentrated to make systems talk, after we can think of standards.
>> This was agreement with OpenMRS people, who insisted on standards, but after
>> long debates I made them agree to go my way. I am actually using XML for
>> data exchange, which is standard in a sense. Will come back to discussions
>> while progress is made.
>
>
> This was not really my impression.  There was a breakout discussion of me,
> Ola, Murod and Paul (from OpenMRS).  Maybe there were long debates
> afterwards which I missed.  Anyway the prevailing view was that before we
> look at a new ad hoc way of doing things we need to be sure that there is
> not an existing standard way which is adequate.  There was nobody who
> thought creating a new xml representation just for this openmrs-dhis
> integration is a good idea.  Unfortunately Ola and I also had not seen
> Murod's work in advance so it was difficult to present a comon dhis view.
> Murod can you share more of what you have done to the wider group?
>
> Main issue was and is to map DHIS data to OMRS data. None of listed
> standards currently provide it. There should be a medium to dictate standard
> and uniform keys, names, and other attributes for both systems, from all
> available standards only SDMX-HD has some sample data and is good candidate
> to provide such service. Parsing is not an issue, validity of content is.
> That is where systems talk. This standardization is multy step and long
> process. omrs should follow ICD10 and dhis - SDMX-HD, there should be
> mapping between SDMX-HD and ICD10. This is my view of standards and might
> not be correct. Project I created is intended to link two systems in closest
> possible way, not to build standards or discuss standards. Taking this into
> account the rest of messages from this line onward are void. When there is
> proper standard and implementation instructions we can easily shift.
>
> In terms of discussion, the following options were considered regrading
> data format:
>
> 1. SDMX_HD - Paul had not been aware of the deficiencies which I had
> pointed out.  He was also at pains to insist that OpenMRS was not committed
> to this format yet, but like us, felt that it is better to align with a WHO
> effort if is feasible.  If its not, he's happy not to go that way.  I asked
> him to get a second opinion on some of the concerns I had raised from the
> OpenMRS team.
>
> 2.  IXF - Paul said that IXFv2 did not have the problem which SDMX has -
> that is that new codes and codelists translate to new attributes in the data
> exchange schema.  Given that we have both already implemented IXF parsers
> this might still be the basis of future interoperability.  Ola mentioned
> that Lars had implemented IXF parser in DHIS but that he cursed it often
> :-)  Lars you would know best whether this is a good idea or not.
>
> 3.  DXF - we didn't discuss much.  A pity, but time was short. This, or an
> enhanced version, will be a fallback if 1 and 2 above are not workable.
>
> 4.  Merger of 2 and 3 - this was quite an interesting thought.  One of the
> problems with SDMX HD is that it is based on an ISO standard.  Meaning that
> there is only a certain amount of scope to change things for the health
> domain - much of the rest is fixed by the ISO parent SDMX.  IXF on the other
> hand can be taken and fixed, developed and improved by its stakeholders.  It
> might be possible to take DXF and new ideas which have been suggested for
> DXF2 including elements of Murod's schema for example and develop these as
> IXFv4.
>
> Paul felt we need to create some sort of grid showing the pros and cons of
> these approaches and discuss on that basis.  There was some possibility of
> making this interoperability problem a topic of the September OpenMRS
> implementors meeting in Cape Town.
>
> Of course all of the above is only formats - there is more to it than
> that.  Murod did identify the minimum information set that would need to
> form part of an exchange to get data from OpenMRS into DHIS.  That is
> useful.  And the idea of writing an OpenMRS module to do the job - rather
> than waiting for OpenMRS folk to do it - makes standards less critical, but
> an expensive way to consider interop in general.  Though Paul had some
> suggestions around how the OpenMRS inference engine should be used which was
> a bit beyond "beginner" OpenMRS.  And Saptarshi had some thoughts around
> using the OpenMRS cohort builder to assist with aggregation which I didn't
> fully understand, but it sounded convincing :-).  We are all agreed that
> aggregation happens on the OpenMRS side.
>
> Its a pity we didn't get much to web services and REST.  I guess we used
> Murod's work as the catalyst for discussion and ended up having lengthy
> debates on standard vs ad hoc xml instead.
>
> Regards
> Bob
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> murod
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs<https://launchpad.net/%7Edhis2-devs>
>> Post to     : dhis2-devs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs<https://launchpad.net/%7Edhis2-devs>
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>
>
>