[New-ITS] Considering the XUM and what ITS worth

[David Markwell]

Thomas
 
I have not thought of the business models as equivalent to either the DIM or
RMIM rather more business process oriented than either. The DIM / RMIM / HMD
/ MT in my view should lose their current role in message design. The
general idea of a CIM (which encompasses all these Constrained Information
Models) should usefully remain as ways of expressing constraints on the RIM
applicable to message instances. The design tools for this process might
even look and feel the same to the user. However the BIG change would be
that they no longer generate element names nor dictate the schema for a
specific message. Instead the constraints would be applied at the
application/business level (by a constraint language that is not element
name dependent). The only constraints at the schema and related instance
level would be those for the a generic RIM based message.
 
Its an extreme view and a big change for me I admit. One that I can make
comfortably from a distance with no direct responsibilities for applying it
to the MIM. However, since the new ITS team started to think outside the box
I have tried to follow the lead but with for now markedly different results.
The big difference is they have the discipline of trying to produce
something. In that situation the tendency to add rather than take away from
the process is understandable. I have no direct role in this but I do have a
strong desire to get the meshing together of terminology models and
information models moved forward through Clinical Statement, TermInfo and
SNOMED CT. I see the diversification of models as at best a distraction from
the real business of clinical communication and at worst  .... well lets see
what happens.
 
Kind Regards

David Markwell


Mailto:david at clininfo.co.uk 
 

  _____  

From: new-its-bounces at lists.hl7.org.uk
[mailto:new-its-bounces at lists.hl7.org.uk] On Behalf Of Thomas Beale
Sent: 31 August 2006 21:20
To: new-its at lists.hl7.org.uk
Subject: Re: [New-ITS] Considering the XUM and what ITS worth


David Markwell wrote: 




David,

I agree with your qualitative analysis.

In what you write below, are the "domain business models" in 2) the
equivalent of HL7v3 DIMs or RMIMs? If the former, where in your scheme of
things are content models for clinical, demographic and administrative lumps
of information, i.e. what takes the role of the current RMIMs?

- thomas beale


 


  _____  

1) Go back to primitive RIM based V3 at instance level by which I mean. 

    i) No business names in the instances.
    ii) Physical RIM level class ontology directly reflected in XML element
names.*
    iii) classCode/moodCode/typeCode structural code driven next level
ontology show in attributes which would be mandatory in all instances (as
they determine next level of semantics)
    iv) Table driven codes/terminologies (HL7, SNOMED CT, and others as
needed) representing
        detailed semantics
 
*ALL instance elements named as RIM physical class names (not just backbone)
This provides a complete high level attribute content validation using a
single generic H7v3 schema. All other validation is business model driven
(see 2)
 


  _____  

2) A single model layer linking this to the domain business models for
    i) static information content [a subset of 3 i plus communication
specific information]
    ii) dynamic interactions [linked to 3 ii]
 


  _____  

3) A separate but interrelated statement of the information architecture and
high-level behaviour of applications that serve application roles in terms
of:
    i) static information content 

*	

	Superset of all 2 i without the communication specific information
but with local non-communicated information and 


    ii) dynamic behaviour in terms of triggers and receiver responsibilities
    ii) dynamic behaviour in relation to content updating
 
Although not strictly part of the communication specification this part 3 is
essential for addressing business needs through communication. In the case
clinical systems this is effectively the kernel of an EHR architecture and
functional model.


  _____  

Kind Regards

David Markwell





  _____  


_______________________________________________

New-ITS mailing list

New-ITS at lists.hl7.org.uk

http://lists.hl7.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/new-its

  



-- 

____________________________________________________________________________
_______

CTO Ocean Informatics (http://www.OceanInformatics.biz)

Research Fellow, University College London (http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk)

Chair Architectural Review Board, openEHR (http://www.openEHR.org)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.hl7.org.uk/pipermail/new-its/attachments/20060831/90983113/attachment-0001.htm