14:55:47 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #hcls
14:55:47 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/09/22-hcls-irc
14:55:49 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
14:55:49 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #hcls
14:55:51 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be HCLS
14:55:51 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
14:55:52 <trackbot> Meeting: Semantic Web Health Care and Life Sciences Interest Group Teleconference
14:55:52 <trackbot> Date: 22 September 2015
15:03:39 <Tony> Tony has joined #HCLS
15:04:07 <hsolbrig> hsolbrig has joined #hcls
15:06:30 <dbooth> Topic: ValueSets
15:06:48 <dbooth> http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=File:ValueSet_approachesv3.pdf
15:08:09 <Marc_Twagirumukiza> Marc_Twagirumukiza has joined #hcls
15:08:37 <rhausam> rhausam has joined #HCLS
15:08:46 <dbooth> http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=File:ValueSet_approachesv3.pdf
15:10:12 <dbooth> tony: two construction options
15:11:37 <dbooth> lloyd: don't frame it as two approaches.  there are 6-7 different construction options depending on how the valueset is defined.
15:11:52 <dbooth> tony: yes, one approach multiple options.
15:12:31 <dbooth> lloyd: essentially only one option: this is the specific set of codingbase individuals that are permitted.  Then there are many mechanisms for determining those individuals: enumeration, hierarchy, expression, etc.
15:12:51 <dbooth> ... But it always resolves to an enumeration of CodingBase individuals.
15:13:02 <dbooth> tony: right
15:13:31 <dbooth> lloyd: but you're implying that there's a decision by using the word "option"
15:14:17 <dbooth> ... It isn't an option for the person generating the RDF.
15:15:16 <dbooth> lloyd: all VSs are named classes representing restrictions of CodingBase individuals, and a number of different ways of expressing those restrictions.
15:17:04 <dbooth> example is from: http://hl7-fhir.github.io/valueset-allergy-intolerance-status.html
15:19:04 <dbooth> tony: this example is a structured hierarchy
15:20:13 <dbooth> tony: direct RDF is not useful.  direct RDF equivalent means: instance becomes instance, type becomes type, etc.
15:22:53 <dbooth> lloyd: we MUST treat ValueSets the same as everything else.
15:23:07 <pknapp> pknapp has joined #HCLS
15:23:12 <dbooth> ... Need to be able to round trip to XML and JSON
15:23:42 <dbooth> ... Other requirements: want to be able to take conformance resources and expose that content in OWL for validation, reasoning, etc.
15:23:56 <dbooth> ... That's a separate serialization that only exists for some resources.
15:24:39 <dbooth> ... These resources will have an EXTRA serialization, but the basic serialization will stilll be there.  Only the RDF will be over the wire.  The OWL will be a different beast.
15:25:19 <dbooth> tony: So there are two forms?  A direct RDF representation, and and OWL one?
15:26:36 <dbooth> q+ to agree that we need to be very clear about what will be sent on the wire in RDF, for round tripping to XML / JSON
15:26:58 <dbooth> lloyd: Portions of the VS def we can expose in ways that OWL tooling knows how to handle.
15:27:20 <dbooth> ... But not necessarily everything.  Full meaning will be in the instance.
15:30:15 <dbooth> http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=File:ValueSet_approachesv3.pdf
15:31:51 <dbooth> paul: Reproducability for round tripping is important, but we need to correctly represent the model to accomplish that.
15:32:30 <dbooth> lloyd: Two separate things happening: turning an arbitrary FHIR instance to RDF; versus taking a structure def or VS def and expose them in OWL to do reasoning on them.  Need to do both.
15:32:57 <Marc_Twagirumukiza> We will need to take into account also what the reasoning engines can handle
15:33:08 <dbooth> ... Difference is that a structure def says "FHIR instances look like this", but instance data doesn't do that.
15:33:24 <Marc_Twagirumukiza> So I support to have both
15:33:37 <dbooth> ... There are specific FHIR artifacts where an OWL representation makes sense.  But most others make no sense to have OWL rep.
15:34:02 <dbooth> paul: Could just as easily say that Patient should have an OWL rep, but not Observation.
15:34:38 <dbooth> lloyd: A structure def says what elements can exist and cardinality, etc.  So that makes sense to map to OWL.  But not a patient instance.
15:34:51 <dbooth> tony: Difference between data instance vs schema.
15:35:53 <dbooth> lloyd: There are certain FHIR resources that act as schemas for other FHIR resources.  That's a use that is mappable to OWL.
15:36:06 <dbooth> paul: But if you render everything to OWL ...
15:36:42 <dbooth> lloyd: But you can't.  You cannot map Patient to OWL (schema level).
15:36:58 <dbooth> ... Because there's no notion of gender, DOB, etc in OWL.
15:37:19 <dbooth> ... There are certain resources that map to OWL (like structure def, VS def, etc).
15:37:57 <dbooth> q+ to say I think we need to move on, and look at concrete RDF/OWL examples
15:39:45 <dbooth> line 159-167
15:41:35 <dbooth> tony: lines 171-194 shows unaligned (where VS is not equiv to the code system)
15:41:46 <dbooth> lloyd: should be done by a single algorithm
15:44:01 <dbooth> tony: line 203
15:44:31 <dbooth> lloyd: A code system is not a class, it's an instance.  There are concepts in them, but should not try to expose code systems as class.
15:44:42 <dbooth> ... Not a VS
15:45:03 <dbooth> tony: code system is a superclass of the concepts that are in it.
15:45:46 <dbooth> lloyd: Don't need to say equivalentClass.  You can say they are all instances that have blah.
15:46:15 <dbooth> ... From my perspective FHIR VS and code system are disjoint.
15:47:06 <dbooth> tony: They cannot be disjoint because codingBase instance is a member of both VS and code system.
15:47:50 <dbooth> ... CodeBase is not a class member of the code system.
15:47:58 <dbooth> s/.../lloyd:/
15:48:13 <dbooth> tony: No, it's CodingBase, not CodeBase.
15:48:40 <dbooth> harold: Every instance of Confirmed is an instance of allergy intolerance Code System?  Not good.
15:49:01 <dbooth> lloyd: A code system is not a class.
15:49:48 <dbooth> tony: code system is a namespace.
15:51:47 <dbooth> lloyd: There's a linkage between code system and an CodingBase.
15:52:39 <dbooth> marc: We should avoid using subclass
15:53:23 <Lloyd> Lloyd has joined #HCLS
15:54:40 <dbooth> harold: Line 159 says every instance of allergyintolerancestatus is also an instance of a restriction on a Coding system that has value allergy-intolerance-status.
15:55:09 <dbooth> ... But the equivalence isn't making sense to me.   Concepts are described in coding systems, but are not specializations of them.
15:56:08 <dbooth> harold: Suggest take one of these options and create a data instance and try to classify it.
15:56:17 <dbooth> ... That will lead to surprising results.
15:56:44 <dbooth> Topic: approval minute
15:56:55 <dbooth> http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=ITS_RDF_Concall_Minutes_20150811
15:57:57 <dbooth> Minutes of Aug 11 approved!
15:58:17 <dbooth> Topic:  Atlanta HL7 face-to-face meeting preparation
15:58:35 <dbooth> RDF subgroup meets Wed 9:00-10:30am
15:59:02 <dbooth> wed oct 7
15:59:09 <dbooth> lloyd: Won't make it.
16:00:00 <dbooth> tony: won't be there, but could call in.
16:00:16 <dbooth> rob: can bring teleconference equipment, but may not be able to join the session.
16:00:58 <dbooth> paul: I will get the equipment from rob.
16:01:31 <dbooth> rob: i'll join for half the meeting.
16:02:33 <dbooth> david: will cancel tomorrow's TF call
16:03:51 <dbooth> ... flying tomorrow
16:04:01 <dbooth> Chair: David Booth and Paul Knapp
16:07:50 <dbooth> Present: Tony Mallia, David Booth, Bill Kleinebecker, Darrell Woelk, Harold Solbrig, Lloyd McKenzie, Marc T, Paul Knapp, Rob Hausam
16:07:59 <dbooth> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:07:59 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/09/22-hcls-minutes.html dbooth
16:39:55 <dbooth> s/approval minute/Approval of Minutes/
16:40:00 <dbooth> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:40:01 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/09/22-hcls-minutes.html dbooth
18:34:23 <Zakim> Zakim has left #hcls