 |
 |
Jon Rogers comments: 9some snipping to avoid repetition) > Interesting argument, but you seem to feel that HTML is somehow > structured to allow the sharing of say path results. It is not. Of course it is! Any paragraph of anything is 'structured' :-) See below. > >3. My question is: *why* do you need to send structured messages > >in the first place? To date, no one has come up with a convincing > > answer. > > See above. I can't see how publishing lab results on the NHSNet in > HTML format, without a structure, and it is reliably interpreting > that structure which is the hard part of EDI. Nononono! This is how it would work (tekkies to translate): 'My' application sends request to Trust's server. Server interrogates path lab application. Path lab application responds to HTML gateway. HTML gateway sends info to Server. Server answers to my browser. This way, whatever the output of the Path lab application (and they must have one, you know, the stuff that goes on the dead tree form?), that output is translated into something that the browser understands (I wish I could draw in email!). Something like: Header: Name: Dob: Address: etc. etc. Hb= WBC= Plats= etc etc. Footer: Same goes for MSU: Header as above Body: as per path lab application output to dead tree form Footer: recommend antibiotic x, y or z (comment by consultant). That output is presented to 'my' browser as is. The browser is pretty good at translating 'code' to text, image, sound, video and whatever takes your fancy and I haven't even begun to talk about JAVA and ActiveX !!!! > 1-2-82, Smith John, 7.12.96, Haemoglobin 13.2 g/dl, etc? How will > you show an MSU, U&E results etc... See above. > OK, but all he can do is download and view them? He/she can't > populate his clinical system Then may be we need a revolution in clinical systems as well ;-) ALL clinical systems at the moment are dated and way behind the technology. Who is going to be brave enough to admit it?? Who is going to be brave enough amongst the big players to junk outdated technology and replace it with clean, simple, cheap and neat ones??? > I am happy to consider alternatives, but I think these are not yet > complete, but keep them coming! You bet :-) and am glad to hear you will consider alternatives. The reason they are incomplete is because they need brains better than mine to work with me to translate into implementable solutions? > I think you are wrong on what the problem is, as stated above. I don't think that I am wrong in saying that the strategy is wrong. besides, it hasn't been proven yet that the strategy is right either ;-) > There is a future for both HTML and EDI - horses for courses! I'll stick with Red Rum for the time being! Ahmad _______________________________________ Ahmad Risk MB BCh Medical NetNoire %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%