Meeting minutes
INtros
ericP: Long tie RDF geek
gaurav: Semantic web technologist at U of NC
jim: Also at U of NC. We've been contributing to FHIR RDF through a grant under Mayo clinic. Done a lot of bio ontology work.
tim: Healthcare software dev. Strong interest in ont and RDF. Working for Firely.
erich: Work at Stonybrook U, long time RDF boy. Been working on a DICOM RDF represesntation. Also int in FHIR RDF.
eric-jhan: Interop arch at BitFocus. Moving heaviliy into OWL. Implementing FHIR more and more. Also int in how FHIR and other RDF representations relate. Been following since 2014.
Rita_Torkzadeh: On a call w Brian Pech and David Booth before. Int in DICOM RDF rep.
DBooth: Started this FHIR RDF effort with EricP and others.
ericP: canonical and Reference don't use the same resolution path.
… They requred differnet kinds of queries.
… We invented fhir:link
… RDF itself does not have relative URLs, but each RDF format does.
… So in converting them to abolute URIs, we had to prepend a base with "../"
… Values of FHIR "uri", "url" and "canonical" types need to have a fhir:link generated as an RDF node, like <http://
… There was a debate about how to do this with Reference.
(Jim shows code changes he did to implement this)
… Something like "uri" needs a prefix added, to be absolute.
ericP: Not sure that profiles are being generated properly anyway, so I suggest disableing profile generation of examples.
dbooth: Does the problem only appear in profiles?
jim: I will check.
ericP: I noticed that MolecularDefinition has a problem.
… Wonder how example errors are handled in the FHIR build
dbooth: Would be good if there's an error in an example, to generate an RDF example with a comment saying the example could not be generated due to an error in the original.
dbooth: Should ask the other FHIR folks what to do if an error is found in an exampe.
ValueSet bindings for ontology & validation #167
tim: This has a valueset binding.
… ValueSets are not yet linked to Code systems, but adding fhir:link would handle that.
… Wouldn't be able use OWL to validate, becuase of OWA, but ShEx could validate it.
… Right now the shex only says it needs to be CodeablConcept.
… Could improved the shex to check it.
… But would probably be worth putting it into the ontology.
… Also related to another issue: 168
tim: When you define a valueset, you can do it w a rule.
… E.g., if you have a code here, it needs to be a descendent of a SNOMED code.
… Would be nice to represent the descendant rel as an RDF subclass rel.
… That would allow OWL to do valueset expansion.
tim: For finding the rel, OWL could do that. But for validation shex would still be needed, for CWA.
ericP: I don't think you'll get validation without connecting to a terminology server.
… Could use a semantic action to talk to a terminology server.
tim: Could put this into FHIR R6. They want R6 changes by Nov 2025.
ericP: The addition of fhir:link breaks a lot of my shex code. Want to consider changing the name of fhir:link to fhir:n .
ACTION: EricP to make a new issue for that
ADJOURNED