> [RexB] I don't think that there will be anything resembling
> an endorsement. (01)
[ppy] I actually would NOT mind showing our intent to work with
the OpenVistA folks ... as long as we are not locking ourselves
in, in the mean time, until something concrete is established. (02)
I say this, referring back to my earlier response to Pat (August
08, 2005 12:31pm EDT) , citing the significant
interaction/collaboration that our two communities have been
having, and to my statement that: "They are "open" and is
probably the most established open tool in the particular space
we are talking about. To say the least, they are a prime
candidate for potential future Ontolog projects where such a tool
is needed." (03)
Regards. =ppy
-- (04)
Rex Brooks wrote Mon, 8 Aug 2005 11:46:14 -0700:
> Thanks, Peter,
>
> I didn't catch this till after I had answered, but yes, I don't think
> that there will be anything resembling an endorsement. And, Patrick, I
> understand and agree with what you have said about such an appearance.
>
> Regards,
> Rex (05)
> At 11:05 AM -0700 8/8/05, Peter P. Yim wrote:
>
>> Pat,
>>
>> I'm with you.
>>
>> I'm sure Rex, Bob and the rest of the team putting together the 8/25
>> session and the First Government Health IT Conference submission on
>> behalf of Ontolog (of which, I am actually not a part) are making a
>> note of this exchange, and handling the situation as they deem
>> appropriate.
>>
>> Thanks for pointing this out.
>>
>> Regards. =ppy
>> -- (06)
>> Cassidy,Patrick J. wrote Mon, 8 Aug 2005 13:38:26 -0400:
>>
>>> Peter,
>>> Thanks for the info. I missed the session on OpenVistA, and haven't
>>> had time to catch up.
>>> Even for systems that have the virtues of OpenVistA, I think that any
>>> documents from the community as a whole need to avoid seeming to endorse
>>> any particular product, unless it was tested by a group project.
>>> Individuals can feel free to recommend products they like, and community
>>> documents can cite phrases like "product X or the equivalent". The
>>> first paragraph of the specific proposal is a single run-on sentence
>>> mentioning only one product, which is prefaced by "in particular", which
>>> gave (me) the impression of a strong endorsement, not much mitigated by
>>> the "such tools as" qualifier. Suggestion: break it into two sentences
>>> and take out the "in particular", and it would to my taste sound more
>>> objective. Proselytizing is fine for individuals, but needs to be done
>>> cautiously by groups, after discussion of whether an endorsement is
>>> warranted. I think this is true regardless of the actual virtues of the
>>> product.
>>>
>>> Pat
>>>
>>>
>>> Patrick Cassidy (07)
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: health-ont-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:health-ont-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Peter P. Yim
>>> Sent: Monday, August 08, 2005 12:31 PM
>>> To: [health-ont]
>>> Subject: Re: [health-ont] Abstract due Monday: FCW 1st Government Health
>>> IT Conference-Nov. 17-18
>>>
>>> Pat,
>>>
>>> While I agree that we should always use something like " .... such as
>>> OpenVistA" (rather than locking us totally into any one particular
>>> product, I have to point out that the Ontolog have had multiple
>>> interactions with the WorldVistA people.
>>>
>>> I list some of those that come to mind quickly:
>>>
>>> o Chris Richardson and David Whitten (both founders of WorldVistA)
>>> are Ontolog members.
>>>
>>> o they are a part of the team and contributed to our NHIN-RFI response
>>>
>>> O we had a full session at Ontolog featuring these two gentlemen and
>>> the OpenVistA product and approach less than 2 months ago - ref:
>>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2005_06_16
>>>
>>> o they have both been active, and David has been in quite a few of
>>> our weekly calls and speaker/discussion sessions
>>>
>>> They are "open" and is probably the most established open tool in the
>>> particular space we are talking about. To say the least, they are a
>>> prime candidate for potential future Ontolog projects where such a
>>> tool is needed.
>>>
>>> Cheers. =ppy
>>> -- (08)
>>> Cassidy,Patrick J. wrote Mon, 8 Aug 2005 11:15:26 -0400:
>>>
>>>> Why is OpenVista selected as a preferred tool? I don't recall that
>>>
>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>> Ontolog forum engaged in any significant discussion of that tool -- I
>>>> have no familiarity with it. Should we be promoting one tool over
>>>> others as an Ontolog position at this point, especially without
>>>
>>>
>>> careful
>>>
>>>> evaluation by the group?
>>>>
>>>> Pat
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Patrick Cassidy
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/health-ont/
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/health-ont/NHIN-RFI/
To Post: mailto:health-ont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?NhinRfi (09)
|