IRC log of hcls on 2016-01-19

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:04:09 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #hcls
16:04:09 [RRSAgent]
logging to
16:04:11 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
16:04:11 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #hcls
16:04:13 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be HCLS
16:04:13 [Zakim]
I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
16:04:14 [trackbot]
Meeting: Semantic Web Health Care and Life Sciences Interest Group Teleconference
16:04:14 [trackbot]
Date: 19 January 2016
16:07:06 [dbooth]
16:07:48 [hsolbrig]
hsolbrig has joined #hcls
16:07:51 [dbooth]
tony: Datatype quantity is modeled differently than CodeableConcept. It's like a CodeableConcept but flattened.
16:10:09 [dbooth]
eric: There is something that looks similar to CodeableConcept, but isn't. Right?
16:10:12 [dbooth]
tony: Yes.
16:10:33 [dbooth]
... Unit of measure should used the same structure, but it didn't.
16:11:02 [dbooth]
dbooth: Should we give feedback on that?
16:11:15 [dbooth]
tony: Yes. I asked grahame but haven't heard back.
16:11:40 [dbooth]
eric: Do these have a min and max of 1 coding?
16:12:20 [dbooth]
tony: I think so, like a restriction on CodeableConcept, but it has text also. We could model it as a restriction on CodeableConcept.
16:14:13 [dbooth]
ACTION: Tony to document the issue about dataype quantity being modeled differently from CodeableConcept, and check with Lloyd
16:14:13 [trackbot]
Error finding 'Tony'. You can review and register nicknames at <>.
16:17:54 [dbooth]
Topic: Index of list items from 0 or 1
16:19:20 [dbooth]
dbooth: In talking with Grahame, he mentioned that FHIR has some indexes, and they start with 0. This was news to me. For FHIR RDF we had decided to start the index at 1, but for consistency sake, I think we should revisit that question.
16:19:24 [dbooth]
eric: +1
16:20:59 [dbooth]
tony: I found one problem with fhir:index -- I used it in two ways. I used it for schema sequence, and that was a problem. Same name for an annotation and an object property causes a property.
16:21:39 [dbooth]
... I will rename it to something else.
16:22:12 [dbooth]
eric: In theory it should not be a problem. It is OWL punning, but there may be bugs that are related to it.
16:22:39 [dbooth]
tony: It's not the punning, it's the loading process when using Turtle. The loader at load time doesn't now what it is.
16:23:13 [dbooth]
eric: There's a set of recognition rules for interpreting OWL serialized in Turtle.
16:23:35 [dbooth]
... But ultimately, punning only causes trouble.
16:23:50 [dbooth]
tony: It was only the loading that was the problem.
16:24:54 [dbooth]
dbooth: We'll re-decide the index (0 or 1) next time we have a quorum.
16:25:21 [dbooth]
ACTION: dbooth to ask grahame for index 0 FHIR examples
16:25:21 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-42 - Ask grahame for index 0 fhir examples [on David Booth - due 2016-01-26].
16:25:36 [dbooth]
Topic: Github
16:27:40 [dbooth]
dbooth: We should be using repository now.
16:38:49 [dbooth]
Topic: FHIR RDF side-by-side document
16:39:16 [dbooth]
dbooth: Need to get it into xhtml and into github
16:39:42 [dbooth]
tony: Can't find documentation on what the xhtml should look like.
16:42:24 [dbooth]
... Want it to be compatible with the FHIR build process
16:42:33 [dbooth]
16:44:41 [dbooth]
eric: If you are doing pull requests against xhtml then you should use a tool that does not reformat it, so that github does not report spurious changes.
16:45:40 [dbooth]
ACTION: Tony to send side-by-side v12 to Eric for conversion to xhtml and pushing to github
16:45:40 [trackbot]
Error finding 'Tony'. You can review and register nicknames at <>.
16:48:09 [dbooth]
Tony's side-by-side document:
16:48:36 [dbooth]
line 76
16:48:58 [dbooth]
tony: It's a flat definition of elements, in <snapshot>
16:50:54 [dbooth]
tony: line 122, lloyd says there may be an overarching cardinality constraint that would further limit this.
16:52:16 [dbooth]
... Reference.display will be come an object property (line 157), whereas Reference becomes a class.
16:53:29 [dbooth]
... line 168 cardinality will translate into owl cardinality on line 206
16:54:18 [dbooth]
eric: This is the same thing we did with ShEx
16:54:50 [dbooth]
... If we have some code that walks through the structure def and spits out OWL, we'd want to document the mapping and test it.
16:55:14 [dbooth]
tony: yes. In this doc (line 222) we show an example.
16:55:41 [dbooth]
... Line 230 (sec 1.3.6) is the meat of it.
16:56:03 [dbooth]
eric: Do we have slicing requirements in FHIR itself, or only in profiles?
16:57:03 [dbooth]
... Even if we cannot write slicing requirements in OWL, we can still write them using our own namespace, and potentially handle them in SPARQL.
16:57:24 [dbooth]
tony: Sec 1.3.6 is the meat of what we need to do.
16:58:23 [dbooth]
... <path ..> will sometimes be a class, sometimes a property.
17:00:59 [dbooth]
dbooth: If Structure Definitions can be sent as FHIR messages, then they need to be round-trippable.
17:01:04 [dbooth]
tony: No they don't.
17:01:55 [dbooth]
eric: The ROI for making profiles interoperable in RDF is much less than for making patient instance data interoperable.
17:02:18 [dbooth]
dbooth: Concerned that that would make FHIR RDF a second class serialization.
17:02:39 [dbooth]
... Not on par with FHIR XML or FHIR JSON.
17:03:11 [dbooth]
tony: If RDF and OWL could be an authoring for profiles, then you've opened a new available tooling resources.
17:10:01 [dbooth]
dbooth: For transmission purposes, it might be good enough to send the structure def as one big string.
17:10:45 [dbooth]
... I don't want anyone to disparage RDF for not being able to represent all of FHIR.
17:11:45 [dbooth]
eric: XML Schema + Schematron would probably handle the expressivity.
17:12:15 [dbooth]
harold: their metamodel is self-defined
17:12:48 [dbooth]
... Therefore we could transmit it as an ABox
17:16:13 [dbooth]
Present: Thomas Lukasik, Tony Mallia, Harold Solbrig, David Booth, EricP
17:16:25 [dbooth]
Chair: David Booth
17:16:29 [dbooth]
rrsagent, draft minutes
17:16:29 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate dbooth
17:23:25 [dbooth]
17:23:32 [dbooth]
eric, re: ACTION: Dale to introduce EricP to Aegis folks about testing the FHIR XML<->RDF translation
17:23:46 [dbooth]
eric, anything new on that?
17:39:26 [Tony]
Tony has joined #HCLS
17:39:30 [ericP]
17:40:01 [ericP]
20:00:00 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #hcls
21:58:19 [dbooth]
dbooth has joined #hcls
22:06:40 [dbooth]
Topic: Side-by-side document
22:06:41 [dbooth]
22:06:59 [dbooth]
sec 1.3.6
22:14:00 [dbooth]
tony: <strength> can be: required | extensible | preferred | example
22:32:27 [ericP]
22:33:12 [Tony]
Tony has joined #HCLS
22:33:54 [rhausam]
rhausam has joined #HCLS
22:39:58 [dbooth]
dbooth: I don't really like the owl:Ontology in everything. It seems like its sole purpose is to make protege happy. But I guess it's harmless to keep it.
22:56:40 [dbooth]
dbooth: How do we generate the URI for line 275 and 273, in order to be fully round trippable?
23:03:50 [dbooth]
ACTION: Tony to see if owl:Ontology can be declared on a blank node
23:03:50 [trackbot]
Error finding 'Tony'. You can review and register nicknames at <>.
23:10:26 [dbooth]
eric: the URIs on lines 273 and 275 should be different.
23:11:41 [dbooth]
dbooth: in theory, lines 273 and 275 are URI squatting
23:15:19 [dbooth]
dbooth: Suppose you are translating a FHIR XML file to FHIR RDF. What URI would be used for lines 273 and 275?
23:18:53 [dbooth]
harold: We shouldn't be deriving that URI from outside information. It should be inside the FHIR document itself.
23:28:09 [dbooth]
ISSUE: How to determine the base URI for a FHIR document, and is it round trippable?
23:28:09 [trackbot]
Created ISSUE-18 - How to determine the base uri for a fhir document, and is it round trippable?. Please complete additional details at <>.
23:28:49 [dbooth]
23:28:56 [dbooth]
rrsagent, draft minutes
23:28:56 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate dbooth