Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add support for at-code coding system in addition to id-code coding system. #16

Merged
merged 30 commits into from
Jan 10, 2025

Conversation

sebastian-iancu
Copy link
Member

Add support for at-code coding system in addition to id-code coding system. Make the at-code coding system a requirement for openEHR RM compliant implementations.

(SPECAM-90)

TODO: add rendered html
Preview of new docs:

bostjanl-better and others added 8 commits June 8, 2024 19:59
- added a new code specification for openEHR with at-codes
- added at-coded examples in ADL section
- reworked texts where it references id-codes to include at-codes

(SPECAM-90)
…intro and ADL2.4 changes (SPECAM-90)

Co-authored-by: Joost Holslag <[email protected]>
@joostholslag
Copy link
Contributor

joostholslag commented Jun 25, 2024

@bostjanl-better Figure 5 in AOM2 should probably be updated. It lists (only) ID codes as node ids. https://specifications.openehr.org/releases/UML/latest/index.html#Diagrams___18_1_83e026d_1423307491544_806168_4397

@joostholslag
Copy link
Contributor

“ The new coding system also carries original id-codes in its archetypes to preserve the original ADL2 codes.”
This sentence should be removed from aom2 2.3.3 similar to #14

@joostholslag
Copy link
Contributor

“ Value_code_leader: String = "at" is not present in aom2.definitions for at coded archetype. Maybe it would help migrating and forward compatibility if we keep this as is from the aom2.definitions for id coded archetypes.

@joostholslag
Copy link
Contributor

Should be put a not on Root_code_regex_pattern: String = "^at0000(.1)*$"
On numbering form 0 vs numbering from one in at vs id coded archetypes.

@joostholslag
Copy link
Contributor

“The changes in release 2 of the ADL/AOM formalism are designed to make the formalism more computable with respect to terminology, and enable more rigorous validation and flattening operations.”
probabyly shouldn’t. Be part of aom2.changes from 2.0 -> 2.4. Also: no changes from 2.0->2.3??

…rchetypes to preserve the original ADL2 codes.” from aom2
@bostjanl-better
Copy link
Contributor

bostjanl-better commented Jul 15, 2024

Should be put a not on Root_code_regex_pattern: String = "^at0000(.1)*$" On numbering form 0 vs numbering from one in at vs id coded archetypes.

I think it is clear as is, I would not add anything there - might make it more confusing...

@joostholslag
Copy link
Contributor

Release of the following adl2.4 spec depends on: openEHR/specifications-BASE#14

@joostholslag
Copy link
Contributor

@bostjanl-better are you able to add rendered html? Otherwise maybe @sebastian-iancu or @wolandscat

@sebastian-iancu sebastian-iancu force-pushed the feature/at-codes-in-ADL2 branch from ee15112 to 1514e73 Compare January 10, 2025 22:40
@sebastian-iancu sebastian-iancu merged commit 713e70e into master Jan 10, 2025
@sebastian-iancu sebastian-iancu deleted the feature/at-codes-in-ADL2 branch January 10, 2025 22:43
Copy link
Member Author

@sebastian-iancu sebastian-iancu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

changes requested

a|Regex used to define the legal numeric part of any archetype code. Corresponds to the simple pattern of dotted numbers, as used in typical multi-level numbering schemes.

h|*1..1*
|*Root_code_regex_pattern*: `String{nbsp}={nbsp}"^at0000(\.1)&#42;$"`
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@joostholslag
discuss how to handle at-coded vs id-coded tables under https://specifications.openehr.org/releases/AM/development/AOM2.html#_adl_code_definitions_class considering backwards compatibility

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would suggest to just keep all in the same class to keep backwards compatibility. The regex for the root node would then simply accept either id1(.1)* or at0000(.1)*. Also in Archie we are just planning to let the validator simply check if all id-codes are either at-codes or id-codes.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants