Some parts of this message have been removed.
Learn more about Nabble's security policy.
I'm trying to understand how to execute a state machine of a fully structured INSTRUCTION, and I have some questions and thoughts to share with you...
The first issue is about archetyping an ACTION that execute and ACTIVITY of an INSTRUCTION. Modeling an ACTION, the Archetype Editor let me archetype the ACTION.ism_transition attribute, but not the ACTION.instruction_details. Both attribute classes (ISM_TRANSITION and INSTRUCTION_DETAILS) are specializations of PATHABLE, so those shouldn't be archetypable (see http://www.openehr.org/releases/1.0.2/architecture/rm/ehr_im.pdf page 53).
Is this a bug in the AE or is an issue in the specs?
If the "ACTION.instruction_details" attribute can't be archetyped in the AE, how could I know what specific structure the "ACTION.instruction_details.wf_details" attribute will have?
Is the "ACTION.instruction_details.wf_details" attribute related somehow with the "ACTIVITY.description" attribute?
The description of the "ACTION.instruction_details.wf_details" attribute says: condition that fired to cause this Action to be done (with actual variables substituted),
What is the meaning of "with actual variables substituted"? This makes me think having an ACTIVITY in memory, creating an instance of an ACTION to record the execution of that ACTIVITY, copying the ACTIVITY.description structure into the ACTION.instruction_details.wf_details, and the update the correspondent fields into the wf_details with actual execution data.
Does this make any sense? or I'm just to twisted :D
The last one!
Now only ACTIONs can change a state on the ISM, but I think an ADMIN_ESTRY could change the state also, e.g. to move a "planned procedure" to the "scheduled" state, there is an administrative step of coordinating date & time, not a clinical action. Again, does this make any sense?!