Re: Serialisation of openEHR Models

[Diego Boscá]

Hi Sam,

I understand it now. I just was wondering if the transformation part was supposed to be there or you were just stating the possibility to express others models as ADL (a possible serialization of openEHR)

Regards

2011/11/6 Sam Heard <sam.heard@...>

Hi Diego

 

You asked:

 

I am curious about this sentence:

"Serialisation of openEHR models can be used to support CDA, greenCDA and other messaging formats".

 

what do you mean for 'serialisation of openEHR models'?

 

Well, it is necessary to combine the archetypes and reference model to get a full statement of what is possible. It is this combination that is required for the transformation to other formats. This includes knowing how document management or participation is handled. Although the combination is available in memory, the transformation is normally done on a serialisation of openEHR data such as that conformant with the openEHR XML Schema or Template XML Schema.

 

Cheers, Sam

 

	Dr Sam Heard Chief Executive Officer Director, openEHR Foundation Senior Visiting Research Fellow, University College London
	214 Victoria Avenue Chatswood, NSW, 2067 Phone: [phone] Mobile: [phone]	21 Chester Cres London E8 2PH Phone: [phone] Mobile: [phone]

 

 

_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@...
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical

[Thomas Beale-3]

On 06/11/2011 22:16, Diego Boscá wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>
> I understand it now. I just was wondering if the transformation part
> was supposed to be there or you were just stating the possibility to
> express others models as ADL (a possible serialization of openEHR)
>
> Regards

Diego,

I don't think ADL is likely to be used as a serialisation of openEHR
data - only of openEHR archetypes, templates etc. But many (most?) users
doing that will use the XML serialisation instead. Could ADL be used for
more purposes? Quite probably, but like any abstract syntax, it needs
its own parser. XML-based serialisations can use normal XML parsers and,
if properly defined, they can be used to turn a document straight into
in-memory objects.

- thomas

_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@...
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical

[Diego Boscá]

I am talking about model serialization: use ADL to express CDA and greenCDA (over their own model) as we do with openEHR ADL archetypes

2011/11/7 Thomas Beale <thomas.beale@...>

On 06/11/2011 22:16, Diego Boscá wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>
> I understand it now. I just was wondering if the transformation part
> was supposed to be there or you were just stating the possibility to
> express others models as ADL (a possible serialization of openEHR)
>
> Regards

Diego,

I don't think ADL is likely to be used as a serialisation of openEHR
data - only of openEHR archetypes, templates etc. But many (most?) users
doing that will use the XML serialisation instead. Could ADL be used for
more purposes? Quite probably, but like any abstract syntax, it needs
its own parser. XML-based serialisations can use normal XML parsers and,
if properly defined, they can be used to turn a document straight into
in-memory objects.

- thomas

_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@...
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical

_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@...
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical

[Thomas Beale-3]

On 07/11/2011 10:49, Diego Boscá wrote:
> I am talking about model serialization: use ADL to express CDA and
> greenCDA (over their own model) as we do with openEHR ADL archetypes

well ADL is designed to serialise any 2nd or higher order model based on
any RM. So creating an archetype based on a CDA RM can be done. I first
built HL7-based archetypes in 2003, but HL7 were not interested.

- thomas

_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@...
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical

[Pablo Pazos Gutierrez]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

Last week I attended to an Ed Hammond's talk in Argentina, and in his presentation he mention a new concept to reach true interoperability: the data element.

Please see page 13-14: http://www.hospitalitaliano.org.ar/archivos/noticias_archivos/11/Jornadas2011/11_11.01-03-Hammond-Interoperability-BuenosAires.pdf

I asked him why this sounds so much like openEHR archetypes and why don't reuse this concept instead of creating a new one (or at least renaming it). He told me "everyone want his own standard", that was very sad.

Besides that, what I see (and many people on that room that know what is an archetype) is a validation of an important figure on HL7 that archetypes work, do the job, and are necessary for interoperability. So, I think HL7 is very interested on archetypes right now.

I hope that soon Mr. Hammond could do a presentation on standarization that show the best of the breed instead of reinventing/renaming the wheel.

--
Kind regards,
Ing. Pablo Pazos Gutiérrez
LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez
Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos

> Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 11:10:55 +0000

> From: thomas.beale@...
> To: openehr-clinical@...
> Subject: Re: Serialisation of openEHR Models
>
> On 07/11/2011 10:49, Diego Boscá wrote:
> > I am talking about model serialization: use ADL to express CDA and
> > greenCDA (over their own model) as we do with openEHR ADL archetypes
>
> well ADL is designed to serialise any 2nd or higher order model based on
> any RM. So creating an archetype based on a CDA RM can be done. I first
> built HL7-based archetypes in 2003, but HL7 were not interested.
>
> - thomas

_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@...
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical

[Jussara macedo]

It remains to be seen how long the industry and governments will still  invest in a new  initiative of HL7 after their badly experience with  V3.

On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 11:54 AM, pablo pazos <pazospablo@...> wrote:

Last week I attended to an Ed Hammond's talk in Argentina, and in his presentation he mention a new concept to reach true interoperability: the data element.

Please see page 13-14: http://www.hospitalitaliano.org.ar/archivos/noticias_archivos/11/Jornadas2011/11_11.01-03-Hammond-Interoperability-BuenosAires.pdf

I asked him why this sounds so much like openEHR archetypes and why don't reuse this concept instead of creating a new one (or at least renaming it). He told me "everyone want his own standard", that was very sad.

Besides that, what I see (and many people on that room that know what is an archetype) is a validation of an important figure on HL7 that archetypes work, do the job, and are necessary for interoperability. So, I think HL7 is very interested on archetypes right now.

I hope that soon Mr. Hammond could do a presentation on standarization that show the best of the breed instead of reinventing/renaming the wheel.

--
Kind regards,
Ing. Pablo Pazos Gutiérrez
LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez
Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos

> Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 11:10:55 +0000
> From: thomas.beale@...
> To: openehr-clinical@...
> Subject: Re: Serialisation of openEHR Models

>
> On 07/11/2011 10:49, Diego Boscá wrote:
> > I am talking about model serialization: use ADL to express CDA and
> > greenCDA (over their own model) as we do with openEHR ADL archetypes
>
> well ADL is designed to serialise any 2nd or higher order model based on
> any RM. So creating an archetype based on a CDA RM can be done. I first
> built HL7-based archetypes in 2003, but HL7 were not interested.
>
> - thomas

_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@...
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical

--
Jussara Rötzsch
Director, OpenEHR Foundation
www.giantglobalgraph.com.br



_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@...
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical

[Thomas Beale-3]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

On 07/11/2011 13:54, pablo pazos wrote:

Last week I attended to an Ed Hammond's talk in Argentina, and in his presentation he mention a new concept to reach true interoperability: the data element.

Please see page 13-14: http://www.hospitalitaliano.org.ar/archivos/noticias_archivos/11/Jornadas2011/11_11.01-03-Hammond-Interoperability-BuenosAires.pdf

I asked him why this sounds so much like openEHR archetypes and why don't reuse this concept instead of creating a new one (or at least renaming it). He told me "everyone want his own standard", that was very sad.

Besides that, what I see (and many people on that room that know what is an archetype) is a validation of an important figure on HL7 that archetypes work, do the job, and are necessary for interoperability. So, I think HL7 is very interested on archetypes right now.

I hope that soon Mr. Hammond could do a presentation on standarization that show the best of the breed instead of reinventing/renaming the wheel.

--

With all respect to Ed (and he deserves a great deal), if in sentences like the one you quoted above you replace 'everyone' with 'HL7', the situation today starts to make more sense.

- thomas


_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@...
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical

[Pablo Pazos Gutierrez]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

I still want to see the glass of water half full: this is in fact a validation and the recognition of an emblematic member of HL7 that the openEHR approach is useful and needed to reach true interoperability, the name (archetype, data element, ...) is not the important part, neither who invented it first, but the use of the same concept is the key.

--
Kind regards,
Ing. Pablo Pazos Gutiérrez
LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez
Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos

---

Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 15:50:42 +0000
From: thomas.beale@...
To: openehr-clinical@...
Subject: Re: Serialisation of openEHR Models

On 07/11/2011 13:54, pablo pazos wrote:

Last week I attended to an Ed Hammond's talk in Argentina, and in his presentation he mention a new concept to reach true interoperability: the data element.

Please see page 13-14: http://www.hospitalitaliano.org.ar/archivos/noticias_archivos/11/Jornadas2011/11_11.01-03-Hammond-Interoperability-BuenosAires.pdf

I asked him why this sounds so much like openEHR archetypes and why don't reuse this concept instead of creating a new one (or at least renaming it). He told me "everyone want his own standard", that was very sad.

Besides that, what I see (and many people on that room that know what is an archetype) is a validation of an important figure on HL7 that archetypes work, do the job, and are necessary for interoperability. So, I think HL7 is very interested on archetypes right now.

I hope that soon Mr. Hammond could do a presentation on standarization that show the best of the breed instead of reinventing/renaming the wheel.

--

With all respect to Ed (and he deserves a great deal), if in sentences like the one you quoted above you replace 'everyone' with 'HL7', the situation today starts to make more sense.

- thomas


_______________________________________________ openEHR-clinical mailing list openEHR-clinical@... http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical

_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@...
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical

[Jussara macedo]

Pablo,

Ed Hammond is on this list, I think he´s  always recognized the value of clinical model and archetypes, but hasn´t fully acknowledged OpenEHR approach. HL7 has been trying to develop their own DCM and presently, as Sam reported on this list, there´s an initiative led by Stan Huff, a former HL7 chair to harmonize the formalism to model clinical content. What I meant is that  there´s already 18 years of hard work in this community and I do hope HL7 use it and not try to build from scratch. Would be a complete waste of time  and money. I think, both  communities can be useful to one another and, here in Brazil, we´re definitely trying to work together to have a single coherent multilevel approach where both OpenEHR and HL7 play an important role. If you prefer to see the half full glass I prefer to believe that there´s place for everyone in this world.

Jussara Rötzsch

On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 5:12 PM, pablo pazos <pazospablo@...> wrote:

I still want to see the glass of water half full: this is in fact a validation and the recognition of an emblematic member of HL7 that the openEHR approach is useful and needed to reach true interoperability, the name (archetype, data element, ...) is not the important part, neither who invented it first, but the use of the same concept is the key.

--
Kind regards,
Ing. Pablo Pazos Gutiérrez
LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez
Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos

---

Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 15:50:42 +0000

From: thomas.beale@...
To: openehr-clinical@...
Subject: Re: Serialisation of openEHR Models

On 07/11/2011 13:54, pablo pazos wrote:

Last week I attended to an Ed Hammond's talk in Argentina, and in his presentation he mention a new concept to reach true interoperability: the data element.

Please see page 13-14: http://www.hospitalitaliano.org.ar/archivos/noticias_archivos/11/Jornadas2011/11_11.01-03-Hammond-Interoperability-BuenosAires.pdf

I asked him why this sounds so much like openEHR archetypes and why don't reuse this concept instead of creating a new one (or at least renaming it). He told me "everyone want his own standard", that was very sad.

Besides that, what I see (and many people on that room that know what is an archetype) is a validation of an important figure on HL7 that archetypes work, do the job, and are necessary for interoperability. So, I think HL7 is very interested on archetypes right now.

I hope that soon Mr. Hammond could do a presentation on standarization that show the best of the breed instead of reinventing/renaming the wheel.

--

With all respect to Ed (and he deserves a great deal), if in sentences like the one you quoted above you replace 'everyone' with 'HL7', the situation today starts to make more sense.

- thomas

_______________________________________________ openEHR-clinical mailing list openEHR-clinical@... http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical

_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@...
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical

--
Jussara Rötzsch
Director, OpenEHR Foundation
www.giantglobalgraph.com.br



_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@...
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical

[Koray Atalag-3]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

Further to reinventing Archetypes etc. the HSSP (a joint initiative of OMG and HL7) has come up with their own concept of an Archetype called ‘semantic signifier’ ;)

 

The more I get into standards biz the more I feel like losing my faith in health IT! I wish people (and organisations), beyond their egos, could really see real lives saved or lost as a result of eHealth environment which we are all trying to create. But...that’s life – isn’t it?

 

Cheers,

 

-koray

 

From: openehr-clinical-bounces@... [mailto:openehr-clinical-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Jussara macedo
Sent: Tuesday, 8 November 2011 9:12 a.m.
To: For openEHR clinical discussions
Subject: Re: Serialisation of openEHR Models

 

Pablo,

Ed Hammond is on this list, I think he´s  always recognized the value of clinical model and archetypes, but hasn´t fully acknowledged OpenEHR approach. HL7 has been trying to develop their own DCM and presently, as Sam reported on this list, there´s an initiative led by Stan Huff, a former HL7 chair to harmonize the formalism to model clinical content. What I meant is that  there´s already 18 years of hard work in this community and I do hope HL7 use it and not try to build from scratch. Would be a complete waste of time  and money. I think, both  communities can be useful to one another and, here in Brazil, we´re definitely trying to work together to have a single coherent multilevel approach where both OpenEHR and HL7 play an important role. If you prefer to see the half full glass I prefer to believe that there´s place for everyone in this world.

Jussara Rötzsch

On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 5:12 PM, pablo pazos <pazospablo@...> wrote:

I still want to see the glass of water half full: this is in fact a validation and the recognition of an emblematic member of HL7 that the openEHR approach is useful and needed to reach true interoperability, the name (archetype, data element, ...) is not the important part, neither who invented it first, but the use of the same concept is the key.

--
Kind regards,
Ing. Pablo Pazos Gutiérrez
LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez
Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos

---

Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 15:50:42 +0000

From: thomas.beale@...
To: openehr-clinical@...
Subject: Re: Serialisation of openEHR Models

On 07/11/2011 13:54, pablo pazos wrote:

Last week I attended to an Ed Hammond's talk in Argentina, and in his presentation he mention a new concept to reach true interoperability: the data element.

 

Please see page 13-14: http://www.hospitalitaliano.org.ar/archivos/noticias_archivos/11/Jornadas2011/11_11.01-03-Hammond-Interoperability-BuenosAires.pdf

 

I asked him why this sounds so much like openEHR archetypes and why don't reuse this concept instead of creating a new one (or at least renaming it). He told me "everyone want his own standard", that was very sad.

 

Besides that, what I see (and many people on that room that know what is an archetype) is a validation of an important figure on HL7 that archetypes work, do the job, and are necessary for interoperability. So, I think HL7 is very interested on archetypes right now.

 

I hope that soon Mr. Hammond could do a presentation on standarization that show the best of the breed instead of reinventing/renaming the wheel.

--

With all respect to Ed (and he deserves a great deal), if in sentences like the one you quoted above you replace 'everyone' with 'HL7', the situation today starts to make more sense.

- thomas

_______________________________________________ openEHR-clinical mailing list openEHR-clinical@... http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical

_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@...
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical

--
Jussara Rötzsch
Director, OpenEHR Foundation
www.giantglobalgraph.com.br

 

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6532 (20111010) __________

 

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

 

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6532 (20111010) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@...
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical

[Ian McNicoll-3]

Hi Koray,

Thanks for the pointer. Thomas or Sam will no more but Ocean
Informatics appears ot have contributed to the OMG document and my
reading of RLUS is that it is working at a higher conceptual level i.e
openEHR data is one flavour of semantic signifier amongst others e.g
HL7 templates.

What is interesting is that a brief read of the OMG document makes me
think that it is exactly the kind of service definition that we will
need for global openEHR resource locators if and when we have
federated archetype/template/termset repositories, although in this
case we are looking at the archetype, rather than archetype-based
heath records.

An alternative apporach might be to build on the IHE XDS work (or am I
barking up the wrong tree!!).

Third daft idea of the day - can we make use of AQL to do fine-grained
querying of openEHR repositories?

Ian

Dr Ian McNicoll
office [phone]
fax [phone]
mobile [phone]
skype ianmcnicoll
ian.mcnicoll@...

Clinical Modelling Consultant, Ocean Informatics, UK
Director/Clinical Knowledge Editor openEHR Foundation  www.openehr.org/knowledge
Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL
BCS Primary Health Care  www.phcsg.org




On 14 November 2011 12:02, Koray Atalag <k.atalag@...> wrote:

> Further to reinventing Archetypes etc. the HSSP (a joint initiative of OMG
> and HL7) has come up with their own concept of an Archetype called ‘semantic
> signifier’ ;)
>
>
>
> The more I get into standards biz the more I feel like losing my faith in
> health IT! I wish people (and organisations), beyond their egos, could
> really see real lives saved or lost as a result of eHealth environment which
> we are all trying to create. But...that’s life – isn’t it?
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> -koray
>
>
>
> From: openehr-clinical-bounces@...
> [mailto:openehr-clinical-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Jussara macedo
> Sent: Tuesday, 8 November 2011 9:12 a.m.
> To: For openEHR clinical discussions
>
> Subject: Re: Serialisation of openEHR Models
>
>
>
> Pablo,
>
> Ed Hammond is on this list, I think he´s  always recognized the value of
> clinical model and archetypes, but hasn´t fully acknowledged OpenEHR
> approach. HL7 has been trying to develop their own DCM and presently, as Sam
> reported on this list, there´s an initiative led by Stan Huff, a former HL7
> chair to harmonize the formalism to model clinical content. What I meant is
> that  there´s already 18 years of hard work in this community and I do hope
> HL7 use it and not try to build from scratch. Would be a complete waste of
> time  and money. I think, both  communities can be useful to one another
> and, here in Brazil, we´re definitely trying to work together to have a
> single coherent multilevel approach where both OpenEHR and HL7 play an
> important role. If you prefer to see the half full glass I prefer to believe
> that there´s place for everyone in this world.
>
> Jussara Rötzsch
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 5:12 PM, pablo pazos <pazospablo@...> wrote:
>
> I still want to see the glass of water half full: this is in fact a
> validation and the recognition of an emblematic member of HL7 that the
> openEHR approach is useful and needed to reach true interoperability, the
> name (archetype, data element, ...) is not the important part, neither who
> invented it first, but the use of the same concept is the key.
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Ing. Pablo Pazos Gutiérrez
> LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez
> Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos
>
> ________________________________
>
> Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 15:50:42 +0000
>
> From: thomas.beale@...
> To: openehr-clinical@...
> Subject: Re: Serialisation of openEHR Models
>
> On 07/11/2011 13:54, pablo pazos wrote:
>
> Last week I attended to an Ed Hammond's talk in Argentina, and in his
> presentation he mention a new concept to reach true interoperability: the
> data element.
>
>
>
> Please see page 13-14:
> http://www.hospitalitaliano.org.ar/archivos/noticias_archivos/11/Jornadas2011/11_11.01-03-Hammond-Interoperability-BuenosAires.pdf
>
>
>
> I asked him why this sounds so much like openEHR archetypes and why don't
> reuse this concept instead of creating a new one (or at least renaming it).
> He told me "everyone want his own standard", that was very sad.
>
>
>
> Besides that, what I see (and many people on that room that know what is an
> archetype) is a validation of an important figure on HL7 that archetypes
> work, do the job, and are necessary for interoperability. So, I think HL7 is
> very interested on archetypes right now.
>
>
>
> I hope that soon Mr. Hammond could do a presentation on standarization that
> show the best of the breed instead of reinventing/renaming the wheel.
>
> --
>
> With all respect to Ed (and he deserves a great deal), if in sentences like
> the one you quoted above you replace 'everyone' with 'HL7', the situation
> today starts to make more sense.
>
> - thomas
>
> _______________________________________________ openEHR-clinical mailing
> list openEHR-clinical@...
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical
>
> _______________________________________________
> openEHR-clinical mailing list
> openEHR-clinical@...
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical
>
>
> --
> Jussara Rötzsch
> Director, OpenEHR Foundation
> www.giantglobalgraph.com.br
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
> database 6532 (20111010) __________
>
>
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
>
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
> database 6532 (20111010) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> openEHR-clinical mailing list
> openEHR-clinical@...
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical
>

_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@...
http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical