[ohf-dev] Re: HL7 Messaging Plan for OHF

[Sarah E Knoop <seknoop@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Grahame,
Just to clarify, "run-time
library with validation" will
include java data structures for HL7 messages? If so, to what granularity?
Will we be able to create, say, a CX data type instance outside the context
of a message? Will there be representation of all the HL7 Tables?

Additionally, I have re-read the PIX/PDQ
enhancement proposal. You are correct in their intent to make v3 a supported
option. This will mostly affect PIX-PDQ server side ... so it seems all
we need to be concerned with (from an XDS/ PIX-PDQ client) is representation
for v2.5.

Regards,
Sarah Knoop

IBM Almaden Research Center
650 Harry Rd.
San Jose, CA 95120-6099
email: seknoop@xxxxxxxxxx
phone: (408) 927-2622  (tie 457-2622)

Grahame Grieve <grahame@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

02/08/2006 10:08 PM

Please respond to
grahame@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

To	Sarah E Knoop/Almaden/IBM@IBMUS
cc	grahame@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Open Healthcare Framework Mailing list <ohf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject	Re: HL7 Messaging Plan for OHF

Hi Sarah

> In preparation for the contribution of IHE XDS/PIX-PDQ client APIs
to OHF, 
> I have been going what we have been using to model HL7 messaging.
It is 
> quite heterogeneous and will take work to pull all the pieces together
> under a useful model. Currently XDS and PIX/PDQ depend on subsets
of the 
> v2.5 and v2.3.1 messaging standards, respectively. Next year IHE has
> proposed to migrate to v3 for PIX/PDQ.

I understood that they were going to offer V3 as an option (slightly
different to "migrate to V3")

> My question for you: What do (should) we intend to have for HL7 on
OHF?

we intend to have rather a lot of stuff. Both tools and run-time libraries
for V2 and V3. Correction: That's what I intend. 

We've not discussed V2, but perhaps now is the time. I am busy porting
our V2 toolkits to Eclipse for OHF
 - run-time library with validation
 - message editor
 - conformance profile editor + code generator
 - metadata viewer

> If it can meet the needs above it would be benificial to use it, rather
> than re-invent, yet again, on our side. I can provide more details
as 
> needed.

I think it can provide the right support - it should anyway. 
I will work on it a little more, then do a limited release to
any other ohf committers who are interested for evaluation

Grahame