gnumed-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnumed-devel] terminology question


From: Karsten Hilbert
Subject: Re: [Gnumed-devel] terminology question
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2009 23:48:23 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 02:27:46PM -0700, Jim Busser wrote:

> Insertion of a tag value into a new Foundational issue would depend on a 
> knowledge of what exists already. Could this be achieved through a 
> phrasewheel
It of course uses a phrasewheel already. Top-sorted are tags
existing for *this* patient, appended are tags used for
other patients up to a maximum of 50.

> I assume that in the case of duplicate values (such as a user selecting
>       4 ortho 2
> but then failing to edit it into
>       4 ortho 3
> the two would sort together and among them by alpha order.

alpha of description, yes

> Can any way be thought of to edit the sort value of more than one row at 
> a time?
Maybe later.

> re the nice-but-difficult idea to have "spacer" rows, I agree to not  
> create garbage rows in the patient record. If feasible, would it be  
> desirable that within any group, the first item would be flush-left and 
> the second and subsequent value among any group indented?
Personally, I don't think it desirable. Also, it's not
really easier to do. Any fake spacer nodes in the tree would
be virtual, of course, not really existing in the patient
record. Just as with the "unassociated" - that "issue"
doesn't exist in the actual record either.

Trying to indent subsequent items would mean having to
actually teach GNUmed about the meaning of the structure of
the grouping tag. This would take away the genericity of
being able to use absolutely opaque, arbitrary tags which do
exactly what is intended. It's a bit like the Linux kernel:
*mechanisms* belong into the kernel while *policy* belongs
into user space. User space here means wetware. It's very
desirable to keep policy out of the code where avoidable.
It's always a balance to strike, though, or we wouldn't have
issues, episodes, and encounters either. For me explicit
grouping stops at the issue level. Beyond that it's all
policy facilitated by a tag.

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




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]