I'd like to do a reality check on the enclosed paper. I'm getting a bit
iritated by the blanket assertion hat XML is the answer to all our
prayers for GP data access. It reminds me of the READ code
mantra of the 1990s. Does anyone think the paper is mad, wrong
or misguided or that the assertions made in eth comparison of eth
timeframes are invalid.
If anyone would like to sign up a a coauthor I'd be happy to include
them and try to get it published more widely.
Rick
Dr Rick Jones
Director of Chemical Pathology and Immunology
Institute of Pathology
Tel:(44)-113-233-5677
Fax:(44)-113-233-5672
http://www.acb.org.uk
http://www.yichi.org.uk
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/rdinfo //Winner - Best Health Database HC99
The following section of this message contains a file attachment
prepared for transmission using the Internet MIME message format.
If you are using Pegasus Mail, or any another MIME-compliant system,
you should be able to save it or view it from within your mailer.
If you cannot, please ask your system administrator for assistance.
---- File information -----------
File: ACB_IT.rtf
Date: 25 Feb 2000, 17:17
Size: 24943 bytes.
Type: Unknown
|