The eViP partner VP players all take very different approaches to the presentation and use of VP content.
CASUS and CAMPUS use a linear model for the structure of the VP content, Web-SP takes a semi-linear approach, and OpenLabyrinth uses a branched model.
In order to provide a measurement for the level of success when importing from other systems, four different conformance levels were defined:
Level 1 – Package validation
The lowest level of conformance implies that the archive structure and content conforms to the eViP application profile. Testing for level 1 conformance can be automated using the conformance testing suite.
Level 2 – XML/XSD Validation
REquires that te XML files are well-formed and valid according to their schemas. The level 2 conformance testing process can also be automated.
Level 3 – Import validation
Requires that the package be imported in such a way that the integrity of the VP is maintained to a sufficient level that an author derives clear benefit from importing the existing VP (as opposed to creating a new one).
Conformance on this level cannot be tested purely by automated methods, and some degree of subjective consideration is requireed to determine whether a tangible advantage has been gained by importing the VP.
Level 4 – Runtime validation
The most demanding level of conformance requires that the imported package must run in a way that respects the original virtual patient, and that all case-related data, structure and educational value must be maintained.
The work of the TRG concluded that levels 3 and 4 conformance must be defined relative to both the source and the target system.
For example, it is feasible that exports from branched systems be level 3/4 conformant when the target is another branched system, but it is extremely unlikely that the same package will reach the same level of conformance in a linear system.