mlhim-owners team mailing list archive

[Roger Erens <roger.erens@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 13:45, Tim Cook <timothywayne.cook@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Roger,
>
> Thanks for bringing this up.
>
> Though there will be more details coming out within a week orso, hereis
> the current landscape.  As always, all input/suggestions is appreciated.
>
> On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 11:20 +0100, Roger Erens wrote:
>> Hi Tim,
>>
>> could you explain your view on the modelling process with the
>> currently chosen set of tools?
>> Is it something like:
>>
>
> for the reference model:
>  EMF -> [XSD] -> OSHIPxx

And EMF being Java-oriented:
EMF -> [XSD] + OSHIPpy
?
And, there are no schemas going 'into EMF'? In the MLHIM-specs of the
reference model you write down the XSDs that come out of EMF?

>
> for the clinical concept constraints:
> [ideas of clinicians] -> [MindMaps] -> [CCD]

The tools in between are Mindmap and Plone?

>
> A CCD is really a zip package with a ccd.xsd as the constraint
> definition but there are a number of supporting files in the package.  A
> manifest will be available within the week.
>

OK, great!

>
>
>> for an application, written in e.g. Python:
>> [CCD]s + OSHIPpy -> A new health care application, ready to conquer
>> the world, using XML to exchange patient data
>
> :)
>
>> Something else:
>> Is it still possible to rename the CDD tool? (I would be willing to
>> help with this PITA-job). Because in my mind this sort of happens when
>> I see that term during reading:
>
> I have even gotten confused when in conversations with people.
> Others can pop in; but I am all for renaming it to MLHIM Workbench.
>
> Here is the reasoning.  XMind is an Eclipse project. It is likely that
> we can (at some point) create a student project to modify the existing
> XMind code to be more specific to CCDs.  Also, on the horizon, are the
> computable clinical guidelines based on the MLHIM RM.  Both of these
> artifacts could and should be authored with the same tool(s).

OK, makes sense to me.

>
>> And, what do you think of HCKR being renamed to CCD-repository?
>
> HKCR - Healthcare Knowledge Component Repository
> Again, because there are other artifacts besides CCDs that will be
> stored/manipulated there.  I would vote for leaving it as is.
>

Just wanted to make that sure; I was playing a little bit devil's
advocate here :-)

>
>>
>> Of course, this is totally personal, although I'm curious if Luciana
>> has a gut feeling about whether other newbies entering the project --
>> drowning (or not?) in all those acronyms -- will pick up the ideas
>> faster when using other acronyms.
>
> Possibly, I'd like Luciana and others feedback before we do any
> renaming.

Yes, I wouldn't embark on that overnight.

>
> Thanks for the ideas Roger.

Glad you take it like that instead of criticism,

Cheers,
Roger

>
> Cheers,
> Tim
>
>
>