Re: [Gnumed-devel] Re: lab data/blobs/tracking

[Karsten Hilbert]

On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 01:33:28PM -0700, Jim Busser wrote:

> I agree that any temptation to enable "supporting" workflow not
And I agree that temptation is a valid one. I think all the
confusion arose from my bad naming (tracking) of what we are
about to do (reviewed status handling).

> The tracking table, over and above its indexing/linking of content, 
> will lend itself nicely to making sure that what needs to be seen 
> *is/was* seen and can also easily enough be *seen again*. So are we 
> agreed GNUmed is at this point able to consider not only the 
> "structure", "mapping" and "input" of data but also construction of 
> clinical (not admin) workflow?
In a way, yes. "Seen" seems to be such a basic and mandatory
workflow requirement that it'll be implemented at this stage
already (as opposed to, say, initiate_action - await_result
workflow).

> So part of the purpose/value of what I asked, and Karsten's replies, 
> is to help keep clear any separation of the administrative and 
> clinical parts? And also, that I might try to maintain an inventory, 
> so that when it comes time for anyone to work on practice management, 
> these unaddressed pieces, and their relationship to what is already 
> implemented in GNUmed, might be more effectively planned?
Surely.

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