IRC log of hcls on 2024-05-23

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:56:37 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #hcls
14:56:41 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/05/23-hcls-irc
14:56:45 [dbooth]
rrsagent, make logs public
14:56:54 [dbooth]
Meeting: FHIR RDF
14:56:57 [dbooth]
Chair: David Booth
15:24:10 [dbooth]
dbooth has joined #hcls
15:24:26 [dbooth]
dbooth: Options 8, 9a and 9b. if that dcm:UNK is in the slot for someone's birthdate, then if you used dcm:UNK for both Sally and Bob, you are asserting that they have the same birthdate.
15:27:35 [dbooth]
eric: The use of dcm:UNK costrains you to predicates that have a range that includes both the values you want, and another value
15:28:02 [dbooth]
... that represents the missing value.
15:29:33 [dbooth]
... When you have values that are outside the intuitive range of the predicate, then you have changed the range of predicate.
15:31:15 [dbooth]
eric: When the range is either a birthdate or 3 null flavors, then your sparql query needs to account for the null flavors.
15:38:03 [dbooth]
dbooth: This looks to me like a viable approach.
15:38:09 [dbooth]
... Other thoughts?
15:38:24 [dbooth]
erich: I'm fine either way, with bnodes or not.
15:38:31 [dbooth]
detlef: I prefer simpler.
15:41:05 [dbooth]
... And prefer dcm:UNK, because it's easier to check than "UNK"^^dcm:nullFlavor
15:48:34 [dbooth]
eric: If you use the bnode standoff for nulls then you can leverage inference more easily.
15:50:52 [dbooth]
eric: What if you have an owl datatype property, and use a bnode as a value. Is that legal?
15:51:02 [dbooth]
dbooth: IDK. Need to ask Jim Balhoff
15:51:24 [dbooth]
detlef: I think it's not allowed in OWL DL
15:54:29 [dbooth]
eric: One axis: IRI vs special literal vs bnode standoff
15:54:42 [dbooth]
... Another axis: Whether we have an rdf:value standoff.
15:56:34 [dbooth]
dbooth: Need to find out about OWL impact
15:57:23 [dbooth]
ACTION: DBooth to ask Jim Balhoff about OWL impact of the different options.
15:59:22 [dbooth]
erich: Right now we're constructing using dcm:34567 or dcm:theKeyword . Either would be fine, but one is more human readable.
16:00:49 [dbooth]
eric: Religious war: Some people think you should use non-readable URIs, so that label can be updated.
16:01:44 [dbooth]
erich: In DICOM the keyword names are unchangeable.
16:02:43 [dbooth]
.. therefore they can be used in the IRIs.
16:03:56 [dbooth]
... and numeric IRI would be owl:sameAs the keyword IRI.
16:04:14 [dbooth]
Present: David Booth, Detlef Grittner, Erich Bremer, EricP
16:05:41 [dbooth]
detlef: Out next week. Back in two weeks.
16:07:46 [dbooth]
ADJOURNED
16:11:57 [dbooth]
rssagent, draft minutes
16:47:35 [dbooth]
dbooth has joined #hcls
17:25:30 [dbooth]
dbooth has joined #hcls
17:25:46 [dbooth]
rrsagent, make logs public
17:56:05 [dbooth]
dbooth: Options 8, 9a and 9b. if that dcm:UNK is in the slot for someone's birthdate, then if you used dcm:UNK for both Sally and Bob, you are asserting that they have the same birthdate.
17:56:05 [dbooth]
eric: The use of dcm:UNK constrains you to predicates that have a range that includes both the values you want, and another value
17:56:05 [dbooth]
... that represents the missing value.
17:56:05 [dbooth]
... When you have values that are outside the intuitive range of the predicate, then you have changed the range of predicate.
17:56:16 [dbooth]
eric: When the range is either a birthdate or 3 null flavors, then your sparql query needs to account for the null flavors.
17:56:16 [dbooth]
dbooth: Okay, so for a birthdateOrNull predicate, when the value is null, it is not actually asserting anything about that person's birthdate. Interesting.
17:56:16 [dbooth]
dbooth: This looks to me like a viable approach.
17:56:27 [dbooth]
... Other thoughts?
17:56:27 [dbooth]
erich: I'm fine either way, with bnodes or not.
17:56:27 [dbooth]
detlef: I prefer simpler.
17:56:27 [dbooth]
... And prefer dcm:UNK, because it's easier to check than "UNK"^^dcm:nullFlavor
17:56:28 [dbooth]
eric: If you use the bnode standoff for nulls then you can leverage inference more easily.
17:56:39 [dbooth]
eric: What if you have an owl datatype property, and use a bnode as a value. Is that legal?
17:56:39 [dbooth]
dbooth: IDK. Need to ask Jim Balhoff
17:56:39 [dbooth]
detlef: I think it's not allowed in OWL DL
17:56:39 [dbooth]
eric: One axis: IRI vs special literal vs bnode standoff
17:56:40 [dbooth]
... Another axis: Whether we have an rdf:value standoff.
17:56:49 [dbooth]
dbooth: If you have an rdf:value standoff then you can skip having an explicit null, because you can just omit the rdf:value triple when it is null.
17:57:38 [dbooth]
dbooth: Need to find out about OWL impact of either using a bnode in an otherwise list of primitives/literals; or using something like dicom:null in an otherwise list of literals. You wouldn't be able to say that the dicom:null is owl:differentFrom any of the actual dates, because today you might only know that Sally has a birthdateOrNull of dicom:null, but tomorrow you might find an assertion saying that Sally has a birthdateOrNull of 1990-12-31 . .
17:57:38 [dbooth]
. .
17:57:48 [dbooth]
CORRECTION ADDED LATER by dbooth: No, that's wrong. It isn't about owl:differentFrom. It's about the multiplicity of the birthdateOrNull predicate. It needs to allow more than one value, so that it can both have a dicom:null value and a 1990-12-31 value, even if it isn't allowed to have two different actual date values.
17:58:06 [dbooth]
ACTION: DBooth to ask Jim Balhoff about OWL impact of the different options.
17:58:13 [dbooth]
erich: Right now we're constructing using dcm:34567 or dcm:theKeyword . Either would be fine, but one is more human readable.
17:58:14 [dbooth]
eric: Religious war: Some people think you should use non-readable URIs, so that labels can be updated.
17:58:23 [dbooth]
erich: In DICOM the keyword names are unchangeable, as are the numbers.
17:58:23 [dbooth]
.. therefore they can be used in the IRIs.
17:58:23 [dbooth]
... and numeric IRI would be owl:sameAs the keyword IRI.
17:58:31 [dbooth]
Present: David Booth, Detlef Grittner, Erich Bremer, EricP
17:58:31 [dbooth]
detlef: Out next week. Back in two weeks.
17:58:31 [dbooth]
ADJOURNED
17:58:31 [dbooth]
rssagent, draft minutes
17:59:07 [dbooth]
rrsagent, draft minutes
17:59:08 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/05/23-hcls-minutes.html dbooth
18:01:21 [dbooth]
s/Options 8, 9a/OPTIONS 8, 9a/
18:04:29 [dbooth]
i/Options 8, 9a and 9b/Topic: DICOM
18:04:42 [dbooth]
rrsagent, draft minutes
18:04:43 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/05/23-hcls-minutes.html dbooth
18:05:38 [dbooth]
i/Options 8, 9a and 9b/https://github.com/w3c/hcls-fhir-rdf/issues/141
18:05:43 [dbooth]
rrsagent, draft minutes
18:05:44 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/05/23-hcls-minutes.html dbooth
18:06:14 [dbooth]
i/Options 8, 9a and 9b/dbooth; Erich added more options to consider, based on DICOM XML conversion
18:06:35 [dbooth]
i/Options 8, 9a and 9b/erich: Extra triples matter with large DICOM data.
18:07:19 [dbooth]
i/Options 8, 9a and 9b/.. Everything in DICom is a list, even if the multiplicity is only one. It adds another triples.
18:07:41 [dbooth]
i/Options 8, 9a and 9b/dbooth: Even though the Turtle lists look more concise to a human, they don't actually reduce the nubmer of triples from having an explicit index like in option 7
18:08:02 [dbooth]
i/Options 8, 9a and 9b/erich: But the Turtle lists allow you to use convenient list tooling.
18:08:11 [dbooth]
rrsagent, draft minutes
18:08:13 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/05/23-hcls-minutes.html dbooth
18:09:53 [dbooth]
s/dbooth; Erich/dbooth: Erich/
18:09:55 [dbooth]
rrsagent, draft minutes
18:09:56 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/05/23-hcls-minutes.html dbooth