Additional discussion needed on Types Registry

See
the 7/25 meeting notes.

We
have a few topics that could use further (email) discussion prior to the next meeting. 
Some comments from the meeting are in italics.

Specifically:

 
  
Should the Types
      Registry only include SymptomType and PrescriptionType, or also include
      SyndromeType & ProtocolType? 

  
   
Effectively,
       the Catalog “is” the place where SyndromeType &
       ProtocolType are defined.  Maybe the Catalog could also be the
       place where SymptomType & PrescriptionType are defined?

  
  
Should
      Symptom/PrescriptionType definitions be optional?  

  
   
Without these
       definitions it would be difficult to author a Syndrome & Protocol,
       but not impossible.  One could do manual analysis of the Symptom
       Store to understand the content & arguments schema.  Ideally
       the SymptomEmitter and Practitioner would provide these types, but
       (again) not required.

  
  
What does
      definition look like?  

  
   
SymptomType

   
    
Type

    
Content
        schema (xml schema)

   
   
PrescriptionType

   
    
Type

    
Argument
        schema (xml schema)