[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gnumed-devel] Document part does not exist in the database

From: James Busser
Subject: Re: [Gnumed-devel] Document part does not exist in the database
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 20:19:09 -0700

On 31-Aug-08, at 11:25 AM, Karsten Hilbert wrote:

However, when being asked to sign (via the inbox) a
document part which does not seem to exist, does it mean that the
client software and/or the schema are missing some protection against
a non-object having been added to a patient's file?
No, we explicitely allowed "empty" documents.

It may need to be further considered what - if any - sense it makes to sign empty documents. It's not that hard to exclude them from auto- generating

Jim, do you think empty documents should be exempted from
generating pseudo-notifications as to their unsigned status ?

I guess it depends on why anyone would add an empty document part to a patient's record. If it is only now happening because people are playing with the interface, and uploading whatever file(s) happen to be handy -- even if these are empty -- then if the scenario would ever happen in a production system, should it come to attention if only to educate the user to stop adding empty parts?

Can the detection and therefore review / signature of empty parts be a warning sign of a mishandled document?

Is there any use-case for deliberately adding an empty document part?

Examples I can think of are:

- a sheet of paper is inserted into a scanner upside down... but if such parts would always be non-zero (i.e. if the part would contain the "blank" scan that still involves a small-sized TIFF or JPEG or PNG) then maybe this does not qualify as a use case

- if a document would, through its syntax, imply an internal part except that the implied or possibly-existing or optionally-existing part has zero content, and is therefore "empty" --- such things I would gladly exclude

Bottom line is that if we do not think that a human can accidentally create an empty part, then I might exclude these from auto-generating a pseudo-notification

Are there two levels to this? In other words, even though we might agree that an empty part (by itself) would not auto-generate a pseudo- notification (inbox alert) would the empty parts still show up as unsigned in the document archive? I am still not sure what one would *do* with an empty part --- it seems pointless to acknowledge "nothing" --- but maybe the inspection and signing of related parts would at least make it apparent when an empty part was *supposed* to be nonempty?

reply via email to

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