14:56:16 RRSAgent has joined #hcls 14:56:16 logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/05/02-hcls-irc 14:56:18 RRSAgent, make logs world 14:56:18 Zakim has joined #hcls 14:56:20 Zakim, this will be HCLS 14:56:20 ok, trackbot 14:56:21 Meeting: Semantic Web Health Care and Life Sciences Interest Group Teleconference 14:56:21 Date: 02 May 2017 14:57:09 Chair: David Booth 15:04:58 Present: Ken Lord, Harold Solbrig, Rob Hausam 15:05:09 Present+ David Booth 15:06:43 Topic: Madrid schedule: Tue May 9, Q4 (4:30-6:00pm local Madrid time) 15:08:25 Present+ Sean Muir 15:08:34 Present+ EricP 15:10:16 ken: Can show MDMI tools generating ShExmap 15:12:08 Topic: Issue 50: Harmonizing pre-coordinated and compositional terms in the information model 15:12:42 harold: We know how to do post-coordinated. SNOMED International extended the spec to add a specific URI for compositional grammar. 15:13:02 eric: Can it be calculated? 15:13:41 harold: Yes. Fairly simple. But we need to start working out: Existing compositional spec does not have a MIME type. Doesn't tell you what grammar is used. 15:13:52 ... Do we need to extend the spec? 15:14:13 https://github.com/w3c/hcls-fhir-rdf/issues/50 15:14:51 harold: When we're converting FHIR to RDF, we could convert a compositional expression to a SNOMED URI. Or we could do what I did in the demo: turn it into an OWL fragment, which is more useful. 15:15:18 ... Michael Lawley is the lead on the SNOMED URI work for compositional grammar. 15:15:36 ... But there's nothing in the FHIR world that specifies a URI. 15:16:24 ... We know that it is SNOMED CT, then could be a post-coord expr, but doesn't say what language it is. FHIR needs the equiv of a MIME type, to indicate it. 15:16:42 ... You have to guess from the URI syntax and lack of a number in it. 15:17:05 ... If we have the SNOMED use case, we'll soon need the generic use case. 15:17:37 dbooth: Should a request be made to the main FHIR group to add a MIME type indicator? 15:17:51 harold: Yes, at some point. 15:17:58 dbooth: How should we move forward? 15:18:26 harold: First focus on the SNOMED case, and come up with examples of compositional expressions. 15:19:06 ACTION: Harold to come up with examples of compositional expression in FHIR 15:19:06 Created ACTION-83 - Come up with examples of compositional expression in fhir [on Harold Solbrig - due 2017-05-09]. 15:19:33 ken: Useful to CIMI also? 15:19:39 harold: IDK 15:19:56 s/Useful to CIMI also/Is CIMI working on this 15:20:29 harold: Previous CIMI datatypes purposely separated a single code to avoid having to parse codes. 15:20:40 ... Postponed work on expressions. 15:21:06 rob: The idea was that for any code system there may be a compositional grammar for it. 15:21:55 ken: Is there a goal to have multiple compositional grammars? 15:22:53 harold: The premise that compositional only involves a single code system is pushing your luck. SNOMED takes the philosophy of absorbing everything. But if you are in OWL space nothing prevents you from combining. 15:24:14 harold: There are grammars that are independent of code systems. 15:24:35 ... If we know the code system we could say that that determines the grammar. 15:25:11 eric: When we talk about how there could be multiple compositional grammars, are there multiple already? 15:25:39 harold: OWL and SNOMED. Also HL7 v3 has one of sorts, but don't know whether it creeps into OWL. 15:27:46 rob: FHIR says the compositional grammar must be the one defined by the code system. 15:28:35 harold: Other codes don't fit in well. Also SNOMED has an arcane mechanism for inner concepts, that only works in SNOMED. (Role groups -- Like bnodes.) 15:29:10 eric: SNOMED has already said "Here's what the snomed looks like in OWL, and it has role groups". 15:29:34 harold: Any but the most trivial will be hard to get right, because people don't think that way. 15:29:57 eric: Can we prototype in the FHIR space what it should look like? 15:30:51 dbooth: A replacement for role groups? 15:30:53 eric: Yes. 15:31:19 dbooth: and then propose it to ITHSDO? 15:31:23 harold: Maybe. 15:32:16 eric: Would be interesting, becuase we could use heterogeneous codes, such as RXNORM. 15:33:19 ... If we prototyped what SNOMED would look like without role groups, then the thing that would make it interoperate with SNOMED is to use the same relationship name. Then a drug could be identified by RXNORM or others. 15:33:53 ... And the use of a more general form of OWL would allow mixing code systems. 15:35:11 dbooth: Is this important enough to work on now? 15:35:47 eric: heterogenous use cases may go away if the compositional grammar allows multiple code systems. 15:36:17 dbooth: I wonder what logic implications might come up, with multiple code systems. 15:36:26 eric: Different granularity. 15:37:29 ... Use cases should show what rules would be fired differently if you have one or the other. 15:37:38 dbooth: Use cases would help. 15:38:00 Topic: Protege does not show bnodes 15:38:07 https://github.com/w3c/hcls-fhir-rdf/issues/49 15:38:24 eric: They understand the problem. 15:40:13 ... There was some conversation about how to find funding for them. Either programmer or money. 15:41:22 dbooth: Eric, are you still planning to pursue the turtle parser problem? 15:41:27 (lost eric from the call?) 15:41:59 Topic: FHIR RDF ontology URLs do not resolve 15:42:19 https://github.com/w3c/hcls-fhir-rdf/issues/48 15:42:26 ACTION: Harold to initiate discussion with Grahame about adding conneg and a variable for ont version. 15:42:26 Created ACTION-84 - Initiate discussion with grahame about adding conneg and a variable for ont version. [on Harold Solbrig - due 2017-05-09]. 15:42:33 harold: not done yet 15:42:57 topic: How to handle required/extensible/example in shex #47 15:44:44 Harold: This is about code system. 15:45:28 ... Required is ok, because we can put the values into shex. But what to do in shex if it is extensible? 15:46:11 ... THis problem is not specific to shex. SHould look at other validators, what they do. 15:46:49 rob: It will allow other codes, but they should be within the same code system. 15:48:17 ... Ideally if you give a code that's part of the extension space and its a code that conveys something that is already in the code system, then you should use it. Ideally validator should warn if you use one that is already there (or in a broader form). 15:49:01 dbooth: So if the code system is extensible, then the validator should allow anything? 15:50:05 rob: If the specified valueset has a code for blue, and you want to send a code for navy, you are not allowed to, because the meaning is in the specified valueset. But not everyone agrees with that. 15:50:20 eric: THat helps interop. 15:51:18 dbooth: So under that interpretation, then extensibility is NOT for finer granularity. 15:51:57 rob: Correct. It is for additional meaning not already covered. 15:52:57 dbooth: Should we close this issue regarding shex validation, because we cannot do any validation for 'extensible'? 15:53:11 harold: yes. But we should validate 'required'. 15:53:51 dbooth: Should anything be done regarding 'example'? 15:55:11 rob: all examples should be valid. 15:56:08 harold: We cannot check them anyway, because there is nothing to check them against. 15:56:48 AGREED: Close issue 47 - no shex validation needed for extensible/example. 15:58:42 rrsagent, where am i? 15:58:42 See http://www.w3.org/2017/05/02-hcls-irc#T15-58-42 16:00:01 ADJOURNED 16:00:22 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:00:22 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/05/02-hcls-minutes.html dbooth 16:06:46 s/David Booth/David_Booth/ 16:07:04 s/Sean Muir/Sean_Muir/ 16:07:08 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:07:08 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/05/02-hcls-minutes.html dbooth 17:13:29 Zakim has left #hcls