Meeting minutes
DICOM
erich: My homework: https://
Concept IRIs
gaurav: No movement yet on HL7 PR.
… We cannot update Naming System properly, because that's not yet in THO. But we can update just the code system, so to push through changes
… We could start putting prefixes onto code systems (instead of naming systems).
… We could then make sure our code works w code systems.
dbooth: Sounds good to me.
eric: Wouldn't be painting ourselves into a corner?
gaurav: I don't think so. We can do one but have to do the naming system later.
… My understanding is that a code system has an explicit list of codes.
… But Naming System is broader. E.g., US passport holders would be a Naming System because it's continuously changing.
gaurav: Also looking for other candidates for what to target next. Radlex publishes an OWL ont w resource URLs.
… To what extent should we push them? It's their official OWL file.
dbooth: I would view the OWL files as defacto spec for the IRI stem. If they later give better documentation, then we can use point to the new doc instead.
DICOM
erich: The DICOM JSON has a datatype that won't necessarily work: SV is "Signed binary integer 64 bits long" but JSON wouldn't be able to handle it.
erich: In DICOM we only need a dicom:null, not null flavors.
detlef's post: https://
dbooth: So we need an option 5a, which is the same as option 5, but using dicom:null instead of fhir:null .
eric: Sentinal + xsd need to give us round tripping.
AGREED: Go with option 5a (to change fhir:null to dicom:null), but still discussing whether/how to represent the VR in an XSD datatype.
ADJOURNED