oship-dev team mailing list archive

[Tim Cook <timothywayne.cook@xxxxxxxxx>]

Just to add a bit more context and clarity....


On Tue, 2009-03-24 at 07:48 -0300, Tim Cook wrote:
> ...
> > The problem you pose now is beyond the scope of the rm specification.

It really isn't beyond the scope of the RM.  In the Support IM
Terminology Overview the last sentence indicates that this is
implementation specific.

Also if you review the example table in section 5.3.2 you will see that
many of the terminologies do carry version identifiers.  This is because
there are changes between versions.  

>  In the
> > datatypes.text package there are classes that allow one to store for one
> > entry into a specific terminology the terminology Id (with its version), the
> > code and its rubric, and eventually a one to many mapping from this
> > terminology to others. 

Often the code and it's rubric is not sufficient to give full details
from a terminology without referring to a printed guide of some sort, if
you happen to have; let us say that ICD9CM manual from 1991 lying
around.

That is why I believe the prudent thing to do is include the entire
terminology.  Disk space is cheap.

Cheers,
Tim


-- 
Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
**************************************************************
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home*
**************************************************************

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part