14:55:48 RRSAgent has joined #hcls 14:55:48 logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/05/24-hcls-irc 14:55:50 RRSAgent, make logs world 14:55:50 Zakim has joined #hcls 14:55:52 Zakim, this will be HCLS 14:55:52 ok, trackbot 14:55:53 Meeting: Semantic Web Health Care and Life Sciences Interest Group Teleconference 14:55:54 Date: 24 May 2016 14:57:42 Chair: David Booth 14:59:24 Present: Amol Bhalla (Infor), David Booth 15:00:32 hsolbrig has joined #hcls 15:04:16 Present+ Sharam Shahpouri, Harold Solbrig, EricP, James Anderson, Brian Pech, Quoqian Jiang 15:04:40 Topic: ShEx validation of FHIR RDF (Harold / Grahame) 15:05:37 harold: Pretty close to converged. There was more discussion between Grahame and Lloyd about where the FHIR URIs belong. 15:06:24 ... There was fhir:CodedConcept that can have one or more Codes, and within each Coding it is okay to have a concept. But should additional code concepts be allowed? 15:07:30 ... There was a hope that the aggregate of the multiple codings could be reasoned about in the outer coded concept. 15:07:42 fhir:Observation.code [ fhir:CodeableConcept.coding [ fhir:index 0; fhir:concept loinc:29463-7; fhir:Coding.system [ fhir:value "http://loinc.org" ]; fhir:Coding.code [ fhir:value "29463-7" ]; fhir:Coding.display [ fhir:value "Body Weight" ] ], [ fhir:index 1; fhir:concept loinc:3141-9; fhir:Coding.system [ fhir:value "http://loinc.org" ]; fhir:Coding.code [ fhir:value "3141-9" ]; [CUT] 15:07:54 http://hl7-fhir.github.io/observation-example.ttl.html 15:10:15 harold: Sometimes we can create a URI for the concept, such as fhir:concept loinc:29463-7; 15:10:26 ... But sometimes we cannot, as with fhir:index 3 15:11:06 ... The troubling point is that in some circumstances Lloyd thought it could be used as a compositional grammar, such as ARM and RIGHT. 15:12:50 dbooth: My previous understanding of multiple codings under an fhir:Observation.code was that it is a logical conjunction, i.e., AND, of the codings. 15:13:12 harold: a third interpretation would be that ANY of the codes completely represents the intent. 15:13:43 ericP: it may be more accurate to describe it as a Union. 15:13:45 In that a receiver can proceed if it understands SNOMED or if it understands LOINC or if it understands something else 15:13:53 eric: Maybe it means more like a union. 15:14:24 sharam: I understand it, and we use it at infor, that all of these codes independently represent the concept. 15:15:15 dbooth: That sounds like logical AND -- all are independently true. 15:16:23 i think it's a Union, not an Intersection 15:16:40 eric: AND is more like an intersection. If there is a coding that I don't understand, then the the other codings are still true. 15:18:24 eric: If it's a union, and all apply, even though it is treated as a union then you can still get use out of it if you treat it as an intersection. 15:19:05 ... If you start modeling them as intersection then the modelers need to be concerned about whether then are the same kinds of things. 15:19:36 ... e.g. x:FracturedTibia and y:SpiralFracture 15:20:04 harold: This affects both senders and receives. We need to nail this down. Also, the coding element itself includes capability of compositional grammar. 15:20:19 ... If you are going to allow fractureOfArm above, then how does it relate to below? 15:20:49 ... My understanding is that if the receiver did not understand one coding then it may understand another. 15:21:07 guoqian: Does multiple coding violate the cardinality constraint in the model? 15:21:32 harold: No. CodedConcept cardinality is 1, but it can contain any number of codings inside. 15:22:40 sharam: From data modeling perspective in Infor, if you look at these concepts they have system property. When you have concepts from different systems, it is semantically difficult to combine them from multiple systems, such as ARM from LOINC and LEFT from SNOMED. 15:22:57 harold: I thought we removed the fhir:Concept from the Observation.code level. 15:23:08 http://hl7-fhir.github.io/observation.shex.html 15:23:53 dbooth: Need to go back to FHIR group to nail down the semantics of multiple codings? 15:24:17 guoqian: Not all codings have fhir:concept in the example. 15:24:26 harold: Right. You create it if you can. 15:24:32 rhausam has joined #HCLS 15:24:48 {fhir:concept IRI*; 15:25:42 harold: I'm thinking of disallowing fhir:concept at the CodeableConcept level -- only have it at the Coding level. 15:27:16 ... I also mentioned the type arc for references and said it is optional. Grahame said we had decided. 15:28:07 dbooth: We decided that *if* it is included then it must be a specific reference type, such as ObservationReference. But we postponed the decision about whether it should be required/optional/disallowed. 15:28:38 tlukasik has joined #hcls 15:29:05 https://github.com/w3c/hcls-fhir-rdf/issues/26 15:29:12 https://www.w3.org/2016/04/19-hcls-minutes.html 15:31:39 eric: david didn't want extra type arcs; I wanted a type arc to enable the patient to be validated without dereferencing the URI. 15:33:03 https://github.com/w3c/hcls-fhir-rdf/issues/25 15:38:52 ACTION: Harold to start discussion in zulip about the exact semantics of multiple codings 15:38:52 Created ACTION-56 - Start discussion in zulip about the exact semantics of multiple codings [on Harold Solbrig - due 2016-05-31]. 15:40:39 Topic: ShEx validator service (EricP) 15:41:13 harold: Eric has made a shex-based validator service for FHIR RDF 15:41:36 -> https://github.com/shexSpec/shex.js/tree/master/rest Git repo for ShEx server 15:41:54 eric: It's a small server. Uses a KOA. I'm adding better error messages to it. 15:42:10 ... Right now if it doesn't match then you get null. 15:42:46 harold: Michael Van Der Zel is using it. 15:44:04 eric: If you give it a focus node identifier it interprets as a relative URL relative to the document. Relatively friendly 15:45:34 eric: Planning to make it a web-based service. 15:45:44 harold: Can it be on the yosemite site? 15:45:55 dbooth: I think so. i'll look into it. 15:46:46 http://fhir.fhir-schema-org.appspot.com/ 15:46:49 Topic: FHIR on schema.org (Harold) 15:47:06 http://fhir.fhir-schema-org.appspot.com/ 15:47:28 harold: It's relatively easy to build if you go to github instructions. 15:47:56 http://fhir.fhir-schema-org.appspot.com/docs/full.html 15:48:19 ... If you go to that page --> schemas -> Full list --> Extension 'fhir' 15:48:45 http://fhir.fhir-schema-org.appspot.com/docs/full.html 15:48:56 http://fhir.fhir-schema-org.appspot.com/Observation 15:49:04 harold: scroll down and look under w5: http://w5.fhir-schema-org.appspot.com/w5 15:50:03 ... scroll down to Observation below w5 15:51:10 harold: One point raised by Marc T (responsible for W3C life sci part of schema.org) 15:51:13 http://schema.org/docs/meddocs.html 15:51:14 james has joined #hcls 15:52:23 ... when dealing with schema.org you have 3 choices: 1. add to schema.org itself 2. create an extension (what was done) 3. conforms to schema.org but not under schema.org 15:53:42 ... Marc also mentioned that schema.org people believe in local predicates. We have Observation.bodySite. They would want to have predicates of bodySite without the prefix, which goes back to discussions that we have had, that the meaning of the predicates changes based on the context. 15:54:13 ... Part of the discussion: value of doing this at all; how to align this with medical stuff that is in there. 15:54:34 http://health-lifesci.schema.org/MedicalCondition 15:55:07 ... If you dig down to the medical stuff they have already gone to great lenghts to align with established medical terminologies such as SNOMED. 15:55:56 ... You cannot see the connections to LOINC and SNOMED, but they exist. 15:56:02 https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg 15:56:20 https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/tree/sdo-deimos/data/ext/health-lifesci 15:56:29 harold: the above URL is the github that goes into schema.org 15:57:03 ... and the second link is the health-lifesci part that goes into schema.org 15:57:13 https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/blob/sdo-deimos/data/ext/health-lifesci/med-health-core.rdfa 15:57:55 harold: Line 66 shows a mapping to snomed-ct 15:58:15 http://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases_conditions/hic_anemia 15:58:51 harold: If you view source of that Cleveland Clinic URL, you'll see it uses that medical stuff from schema.org 15:59:12 ... Marc T wants to align with FHIR. 15:59:40 dbooth: We should absolutely align. 16:00:00 eric: Mayo use case is talking about medical knowledge domain, rather than the medical records domain. 16:00:14 s/Mayo/Cleveland Clinic/ 16:00:59 eric: My guess is that there will be more use cases for medical knowledge than records in schema.org. 16:01:33 harold: we learned that at the moment google's external search engine pays attention to this, but their internal appliance does not. 16:01:49 ... It would help dramatically if it did. 16:02:58 harold: There is deidentified data at Mayo that could be exposed using FHIR. 16:04:55 ACTION: DBooth to look into hosting ShEx-based FHIR RDF validator on yosemiteproject.org 16:04:55 Created ACTION-57 - Look into hosting shex-based fhir rdf validator on yosemiteproject.org [on David Booth - due 2016-05-31]. 16:05:54 harold: Need to show that the FHIR RDF is round trippable. 16:06:03 dbooth: Should be checked in the build, for all examples. 16:06:59 ADJOURNED 16:08:09 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:08:09 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/05/24-hcls-minutes.html dbooth 16:11:09 Present+ Rob Hausam, Thomas Lukasik 16:11:42 Present+ Rob Hausam, Thomas Lukasik 16:11:46 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:11:46 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/05/24-hcls-minutes.html dbooth 16:18:02 ISSUE: What are the exact semantics of multiple codings for an Observation.code? 16:18:02 Created ISSUE-28 - What are the exact semantics of multiple codings for an observation.code?. Please complete additional details at .