mlhim-owners team mailing list archive

[Timothy Cook <timothywayne.cook@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi All,

This is very preliminary since I have not spent much time with Acceleo yet.

On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 10:31, Luciana Tricai Cavalini
<lutricav@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Here's my intuition again: why do we need to have an intermediate tool
> to edit the CCDs? My impression is that we are biased by the openEHR
> protocol: Reference Model, archetypes and an Archetype Editor. Thanks
> Lord we got rid of the Template Designer and the Terminology Server. Why
> not thinking about getting rid of the "archetype editor"? Why not
> considering the possibility of editing the CCDs directly with Eclipse,
> Acceleo, or whatever tool, from the Reference Model ecore model?

Yes.  It seems that at this point you could create Acceleo templates
from the MLHIM2 Ecore model that would be CCDs.   However, I am not
sure that teaching Acceleo template design to the average healthcare
domain expert is a desirable choice.  So to clarify my comment.  I
believe we need a graphical tool built on GMF that will create Acceleo
template based CCDs.   Basically this is an Acceleo template that
transforms the graphical artifact into an Acceleo template.  Does this
make sense?



>
> I understand. We know that HKCR is critical. But maybe there is an
> alternative of generating those unique identifiers directly from the
> Eclipse/Acceleo complex.

Yes.  During the graphical to Acceleo template CCD conversion.  HKCR
would no longer need to perform that step and will only need some
user/group management stuff and a specific workflow.  As well as the
RSS  CCD discovery capability.

At least that are my thoughts at this point.

Comments, questions, other thoughts?

--Tim