Re: [Gnumed-devel] history types (was: little project for non-coders)

[Karsten Hilbert]

> At 11:05 AM +0100 12/14/04, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
> >If we do want to *encode* nesting arbitrarily constraining
> >ourselves (in data, not in concept)
> 
> Meaning the code assigned to a "child" item would be an extension of 
> the code used for the "parent" item? Making the code long (awkward) 
> to use - unless auto-completion -- and up/down cursoring among values 
> -- could be provided for tags?
I was trying to say that we should not restrict any level of
nesting being put inside the table (eg. the data) but we need
not support *using* that knowledge *codewise* for the time
being.

Eg. the user should be free to label data as "past history" as
well as "previous operations" as well as "significant past
diagnoses" the latter two being child types of the first. But
we need not exploit that fact in the application for now.

Karsten
-- 
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD  4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346