14:58:43 RRSAgent has joined #hcls 14:58:43 logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/07/21-hcls-irc 14:58:47 rrsagent, make logs public 14:58:54 Meeting: FHIR RDF 14:58:57 Chair: David Booth 15:05:11 Topic: RDF Lists and OWL 15:05:24 jim: Still working on OWL API PR. 15:07:09 jim: Use of RDF lists is technically an OWL violation. But I've been looking at the OWL API to enable it to work properly with RDF lists anyway. 15:07:59 ... Concensus seems to be that we want to RDF lists, even if it technically violates the OWL spec, provided that OWL tooling can use it. 15:08:45 eric: The other issue was whether fhir:value can be both a datatype and an object type. 15:10:52 ... We could use separate properties for those if needed. 15:16:43 jim: Could also change all the lists to a different namespace. 15:17:00 eric: That's hilarious! 15:18:24 dbooth: That's one of several work-arounds that we could offer. 15:20:57 dbooth: Do we have consensus to continue going ahead with the RDF list approach provided that Jim is successful in getting it to work with OWL API? 15:21:39 eric: It would be easier to sell it if we could demonstrate that the namespace renameing hack works as a workaround 15:22:00 ACTOIN: jim to show the namespace renameing hack works as a workaround 15:23:43 a/ACTOIN/ACTION/ 15:26:08 Topic: Concept IRIs 15:27:54 ACTION: Gaurav to sched followup with TSMG on Monday. 15:28:26 Topic: Properties with both scalar and object range: fhir:value inside of fhir:value #102 15:30:31 https://github.com/w3c/hcls-fhir-rdf/issues/102 15:30:54 jim: It causes reasoners to treat it as an annotation property -- loses the semantics. 15:31:46 eric: This is also a problem with fhir:Codes , because we're adopting the FHIR names for properties. 15:31:54 ... Observation.code 15:36:14 jim: rdf:value is not a valid property name. 15:38:02 dbooth: Should we emit a different property name for datatype vs object properties? 15:39:12 jim: I like that idea, of using two property names. 15:39:56 eric: Easier to rename the scalar property. 15:42:07 dbooth: But FHIR JSON uses the word "value" for that, so I'd prefer to rename the valueX property. Might even call it literally fhir:valueX. 15:42:27 eric: Or fhir:_valueX 15:43:23 eric: Or fhir:value_X 15:44:04 houcemedine: or fhir;hasValue 15:51:05 AGREED: Use two different property names 15:56:53 Or also fhir:value_x. 15:57:09 rob: i prefer lower case x 15:57:37 ... Because if it were a datatype it would start with a capital letter. 16:00:29 Dbooth: Preferences: value_x, value_x, value_x, value-x 16:00:43 AGREED: use fhir:value_x for object properties. 16:03:06 rob: Will this be only for properties that are union types or for all object properties? 16:03:50 ACTION: Rob to figure this out. 16:06:22 ACTION: Dbooth to look at what else we need to tie up. 16:11:22 Present: David Booth, Houcemeddine, Jim Balhoff, Dagmar, EricP, Rob Hausam, Gaurav Vaidya 16:11:33 ADJOURNED 16:11:39 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:11:39 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/07/21-hcls-minutes.html dbooth 16:12:35 s/tie up/tie up for R5/ 16:12:38 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:12:38 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/07/21-hcls-minutes.html dbooth 16:13:40 s/value-x/value_x/ 16:13:42 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:13:42 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/07/21-hcls-minutes.html dbooth 16:14:39 i/figure this/eric: Oops, that's a problem. We didn't consider that. 16:14:41 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:14:41 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/07/21-hcls-minutes.html dbooth