This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
<meta name="googlebot" content="noindex">

Difference between revisions of "ITS RDF ConCall Agenda"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 12: Line 12:
 
See also [http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=RDF_for_Semantic_Interoperability#Work_Projects Work Projects]
 
See also [http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=RDF_for_Semantic_Interoperability#Work_Projects Work Projects]
  
−
== DRAFT Agenda for 2-Jun-2015 ==
+
== Agenda for 2-Jun-2015 ==
 
# Role call and agenda
 
# Role call and agenda
 
# Moderation and use of a SPEAKER QUEUE
 
# Moderation and use of a SPEAKER QUEUE
Line 40: Line 40:
 
## [http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=ITS_RDF_Concall_Minutes_20150511 May 11 Paris]
 
## [http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=ITS_RDF_Concall_Minutes_20150511 May 11 Paris]
 
# The need for terminologies in RDF (Claude)
 
# The need for terminologies in RDF (Claude)
−
# Side-by-side example of two FHIR RDF approaches (Tony Mallia)<br>http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=File:FHIR_RDF_Sample_side_by_side_comparisons.pdf
 
 
# Continuing on FHIR RDF:
 
# Continuing on FHIR RDF:
 +
## Closing out the issue of blank nodes and OWL reasoning -- [http://dbooth.org/2015/fhir/bnodes/bnode-test.html explanation by DBooth]
 
## FHIR element ordering.  Some possibilities:
 
## FHIR element ordering.  Some possibilities:
 
### [http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_list rdf:List]
 
### [http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_list rdf:List]
Line 47: Line 47:
 
### [http://www.essepuntato.it/lode/owlapi/http://purl.org/co/ Collections Ontology]
 
### [http://www.essepuntato.it/lode/owlapi/http://purl.org/co/ Collections Ontology]
 
### [http://goo.gl/8PNuAG Simple List Conventions]
 
### [http://goo.gl/8PNuAG Simple List Conventions]
−
## What URI to use for observation.code instance, or whether to use a blank node, which does not work well with owl reasoners.  Potential Options: 1. use blank nodes and let applications deal with the problem by minting skolem URIs or something else; 2. define a standard way to form a URI; 3. use a skolem URI using the well-known convention defined by RDF.  http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#h3_section-skolemization
+
## Side-by-side example of two FHIR RDF approaches (Tony Mallia)<br>http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=File:FHIR_RDF_Sample_side_by_side_comparisons.pdf
  
 
== Teleconference Details ==
 
== Teleconference Details ==

Revision as of 20:19, 1 June 2015

Return to ITS Main Page | ITS RDF Minutes 2015 | All ITS RDF Pages | ITS Email Archives | W3C HCLS Email Archives | Issues List | W3C Clinical Observations Interoperability

Weekly joint teleconference of the HL7 ITS subgroup on RDF for Semantic Interoperability and the W3C Healthcare and Life Sciences group on Clinical Observations Interoperability.

See also Work Projects

Agenda for 2-Jun-2015

  1. Role call and agenda
  2. Moderation and use of a SPEAKER QUEUE
  3. Pick a scribe
  4. Approve Minutes of previous meetings
    1. May 5
    2. May 11 Paris
    3. May 12 informal teleconference
    4. May 19
    5. May 26
  5. Review of Action Items
    1. ACTION: JohnMattison to provide example CCDA for trying with ShEx [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/12/23-hcls-minutes.html#action02]
  6. FHIR RDF and Validation/Translation Task Force (Wednesdays 11am Boston timezone, same teleconference details as below except for the day)
    1. Moderation and use of a SPEAKER QUEUE
    2. Notes from May 20 Notes from May 27 teleconference
    3. blank nodes as CodeableConcept instances
    4. Side-by-side example of two FHIR RDF approaches - references (Tony Mallia)
      http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=File:FHIR_RDF_Sample_side_by_side_comparisons.pdf
      1. ISSUE-8 - If we treat observation.code as an instance of a class, should that class represent the disease itself or a *description* of the disease?
        1. Kerstin suggests: https://code.google.com/p/ogms/
      2. ISSUE-9 - Does observation.code need to be a uri instead of a blank node, to work well with owl reasoners?
    5. FHIR element ordering. Some possibilities:
      1. rdf:List
      2. Ordered List Ontology
      3. Collections Ontology
      4. Simple List Conventions
  7. Debriefing from HL7 Meeting - Paris May 10-15
    1. May 11 Paris
  8. The need for terminologies in RDF (Claude)
  9. Continuing on FHIR RDF:
    1. Closing out the issue of blank nodes and OWL reasoning -- explanation by DBooth
    2. FHIR element ordering. Some possibilities:
      1. rdf:List
      2. Ordered List Ontology
      3. Collections Ontology
      4. Simple List Conventions
    3. Side-by-side example of two FHIR RDF approaches (Tony Mallia)
      http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=File:FHIR_RDF_Sample_side_by_side_comparisons.pdf

Teleconference Details

Tuesdays, 11:00am Eastern US (Boston) time zone
Zakim (W3C teleconference bridge).
Dial-In #: +1.617.761.6200 (Cambridge, MA)
VoIP address: sip:zakim@voip.w3.org
Participant Access Code: 4257 ("HCLS")
IRC: irc.w3.org port 6665 channel #hcls

Screen sharing (when used) is courtesy of Claude Nanjo. It is only used for screen sharing -- not for the teleconference bridge. The W3C teleconference bridge (above) will still be used even when we are using GoToMeeting for screen sharing. To join the screen sharing, browse to:

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/157514853
Access Code: 157-514-853

See also:

Upcoming

  1. Github page on RDF
  2. Discuss Yosemite Project. Add who is doing what?
  3. Discuss use cases (when Guoqian is available)
  4. Valuesets in FHIR (Lloyd)
    1. See also Tony Mallia's latest Terminology Binding draft

Work Projects

Moved to RDF for Semantic Interoperability home page

Retrieved from "https://wiki.hl7.org/w/index.php?title=ITS_RDF_ConCall_Agenda&oldid=100619"