[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnumed-devel] Challenges in lab test aggregation - panels
From: |
Karsten Hilbert |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnumed-devel] Challenges in lab test aggregation - panels |
Date: |
Mon, 9 Sep 2013 17:52:14 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 03:08:14PM +0000, Jim Busser wrote:
>>> But what about the tests which had *not* been aggregated
>>> under a test type?
>>
>> The database acts as if they had their own meta test type
>> defined. IOW, they are "linked" to a virtual meta test type.
>> Each to their own.
>
> Therefore …
>
> 1) a need for a designated common "base" unit, within meta
> test type (per meta test type), to serve as an "arbiter"
> when the components of a meta type each (possibly) had a
> different unit
True. It makes sense to add that once we implement "arbiting".
> 2) if (1) is needed, then is it still useful to maintain
> within test_types a separate "base" unit?
It allows to arbit values of one and the same test type w/o
the need for a meta test type.
Karsten
--
GPG key ID E4071346 @ gpg-keyserver.de
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346