15:03:39 RRSAgent has joined #hcls 15:03:39 logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/06/07-hcls-irc 15:03:41 RRSAgent, make logs world 15:03:41 Zakim has joined #hcls 15:03:43 Zakim, this will be HCLS 15:03:43 ok, trackbot 15:03:44 Meeting: Semantic Web Health Care and Life Sciences Interest Group Teleconference 15:03:44 Date: 07 June 2016 15:05:49 Topic: ShEx validator service 15:06:22 eric: harold and michael are using it. they're also using Jose's implementation. harold and grahame are putting jose's implementation into the build spec. 15:06:37 dbooth: will that do round-trip testing? 15:06:40 eric: no. 15:07:20 ... We could try writing some genx in there and do round-tripping. 15:08:01 ... But not needed for round=-tripping, becauise grahame does it through their reference library anyway. 15:08:55 ... Harold has validated all 450 examples in the FHIR core! 15:09:08 ... And it found a bunch of errors. 15:09:14 dbooth: any need followup? 15:09:46 Topic: Validation use cases 15:11:28 eric: 4 categories: (2x2 matrix) 1. whether or not you are dealing with just the core, vs extensible stuff (FHIR extensions); 2. looking at a single resource on its own, vs validating a constellation of resources. 3. Are you dealing with profiles or only the core FHIR spec? 15:11:55 s/4 categories: (2x2 matrix)/Three variables: 15:12:28 ... And another consideration: where you have a profile, but there are extension in the data that you do not know about from the profile, in particular non-modifier extensions. 15:13:18 ... E.g., observation for a Mayo clinic admission, and it is also a CDC-monitored respiratory disease observation 15:13:56 ... We need different constraints depending on these criteria. 15:14:22 ... If you want to enforce the validity. 15:14:49 ... If something references a fhir:MedicationDispense, do we validate that referent? 15:16:06 ... As soon as you say that you want to chase all of the referents, then you pull in all of ShEx at once. 15:16:33 ... But if you don't pull in the referent then the validation will fail. 15:19:53 dbooth: Don't want to have to chase everything. Maybe you should have to say explicitly what you want to validate. 15:21:15 eric: Could have a skinny mode (that only validates the current resource) and a fat mode (that validates everything that is referenced, recursively) 15:21:30 dbooth: The fat mode sounds like a high bar, because it requires everything to be loaded. 15:21:55 eric: yes, but that's a common situation, because usually have the full patient record there. 15:23:04 shahram: we have a similar problem, but a bit different. We create list of known resources, and stop there. 15:23:20 ... We treat the known resources differently -- they are resources of a known type. 15:24:00 ... We create a list of the types that we want to validate. 15:24:45 ... We want to aggregate clinical data. 15:29:43 dbooth: how about if the reference declares the fhir:intendedType . Then the rdf:type would be optional, but if it is there, then it must match the fhir:intendedType ? 15:30:41 eric: MedicationOrder references an Observation, and an rdf:type triple that says it is an Observation. 15:31:18 ... Or instead it could say fhir:intendedType 15:32:04 ... The local validation just says that an Observation needs an rdf:type Observation. 15:32:46 ... And the extended validation also needs a status. But you cannot tell what the status is if you just see a reference to an Observation. 15:40:53 rhausam has joined #HCLS 15:44:24 eric: Are people using XML schema for validation? 15:44:32 amol: We use xml schema. 15:44:51 eric: Are you mostly validating workflow? Amol: yes. 15:45:10 eric: According to grahame, the xml does not validate any of the references. 15:45:29 ... Though in theory it could look for the string "Patient" in the URL 15:47:15 eric: Maybe we should do the skinny validation first, using a different type for the reference than the referent. 15:47:43 eric: What RDF advantages are you trying to get? 15:48:39 amol: We can handle many kinds of messages. We have clients who will send CSV files. 15:54:07 eric: Other axes: 1. constellation vs local 2. whether or not it has FHIR extensions; The model Josh and I wrote a couple of years ago modeled extensions as more RDF statements. The downside is that we cannot close the shapes, i.e., disallow anything else. 3. Is it dictated by a profile vs base FHIR? Is there a profile that say what else to expect in the Observation? 15:56:44 ... Also, how much will people validate with the expectation of a closed shape? i.e., what to do about extra data? Is that a viable way to encode extensions? 15:57:30 Topic: Failing (negative) validation tests 15:57:51 eric: Grahame thought he could do something. 15:58:35 ... He has a dir of tests, and it has both negative and positive tests. He thinks he will be able to produce them, and in each format. 16:00:16 Chair: David Booth 16:01:54 Present: David Booth, EricP, Rob Hausam, Brian Pech, Shahram, Amol, James Anderson 16:02:07 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:02:07 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/06/07-hcls-minutes.html dbooth 17:04:03 james has joined #hcls 17:04:40 eric, are you in? 18:03:38 Zakim has left #hcls 21:05:04 RRSAgent has joined #hcls 21:05:04 logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/06/07-hcls-irc 21:05:06 RRSAgent, make logs world 21:05:06 Zakim has joined #hcls 21:05:08 Zakim, this will be HCLS 21:05:08 ok, trackbot 21:05:09 Meeting: Semantic Web Health Care and Life Sciences Interest Group Teleconference 21:05:09 Date: 07 June 2016 21:05:21 Topic: ============= 5pm Call ================ 21:05:53 i/rrsagent, draft minutes/ADJOURNED 22:58:04 cloudcell_ has joined #HCLS