Re: [Gnumed-devel] Re: Keeping gnumed focussed toward 0.1

[Ian Haywood]

J Busser wrote:
> 1) if (user and) patient are defined automatically, would patient occupy 
> the value for  gmDemographicRecord.cIdentity, such that using it to 
> denote the referral doctor or therapist (the "referee" as defined in the 
> referral table) creates a conflict?
No, there are two instances of the class gmDemographicRecord.cIdentity, they 
don't interfere with each other at all.
> 2) in the manual, are we envisioning the Administrator as a person with 
> network management (sysop-type) skills *maybe* able to modify their own 
> forms, or will we consider Administrator to be an "office manager" who 
> would add and configure users, reset passwords, adjust GnuMed privileges 
> and liaise with the installation's IT support but have *limited* 
> computer skills outside what the gnumed GUI provides?
Good question.
It would be nice to have something like MS-Access with a nice GUI where users 
can
generate their own form templates. However for stuff like scripts I don't
think this is ever going to have the flexibility: form writers need
to be able to mix Python and LaTeX, so some programming (not a lot, no
harder than writing a Word macro in basic) is required.
> 3) I noticed in the schema
> - form_defs, form_fields, form_type
We wouldn't use these any more.
> - form_instances (and the "holders" form_data, form_fields)
This would be still be used.
> - form_job_queue
no change
> - paper_sizes
no change
> - referral
no change, we can use this now, with the old forms system we couldn't.
> - clin_medication
no change, not related at all.

Ian

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature