W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > February 2006

Re: HL7 and patient records in RDF/OWL?

From: John Madden <john.madden@duke.edu>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 09:42:11 -0500
Message-Id: <A7984584-188F-42C7-B388-1B12615F0E1F@duke.edu>
Cc: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
To: Eric Miller <em@w3.org>


Thanks for this very informative response. I had not really  
appreciated until just now that GRDDL was intended to be applicable  
to arbitrary XML instance data as well, and this opens tremendous  
opportunities (but also suggests a need to really beat the drum among  
document standards groups !!!)

I wonder whether this general item (RDF embedding technologies)  
deserves an explicit place in one of the workgroups. I don't think  
the best home is Ontologies workgroup. Maybe the Process/Choreography  


On Feb 10, 2006, at 9:15 AM, Eric Miller wrote:

> On Feb 10, 2006, at 3:41 AM, John Madden wrote:
>> Daniel,
>> I spoke with Mark Musen about this project at the F2F, and we  
>> (SNOMED) would be eager to work collaboratively with NCBO on this  
>> as a demo. I'm coming out to the Protege short course next month  
>> (funded by SNOMED) and I'll have some material for you by then.
>> (a) I think is to a large extent a "just-do-it" question, and we  
>> definitely want to "do it". The interesting part to me is the  
>> follow-up project of showing how OWL fragments built separately in  
>> this way can be related to a more global ontology that may not be  
>> quite so rigorously formal; that's (b).
>> For me, in many ways the hardest part is (c), a standard way of  
>> encapsulating RDF-family markup in xml-schema dependent document  
>> formats. (I know this takes us afield from "ontologies" per se.  
>> Personally, I'd like to see GRDDL applied to these formats, but,  
>> we've got to be realistic that clinical medical documents today  
>> are almost never natively html, and GRDDL is/was rather html- 
>> focused. Also, you might argue that these formats do not assume  
>> web connectivity so it is insufficient to merely point to an  
>> extraction transform somewhere out on the web, when that might not  
>> be accessible; I'm not sure whether that really matters.)
> To be clear, GRRDL is not specific to XHTML and can be used for  
> translating XML instance data as well. One can use GRDDL for  
> "schema annotation" and transform all of the instance data that  
> conforms to a particular schema into RDF. I think the following  
> provides some of the relevant bits that explain this
> - http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/grddl/#ns-bind
> The current GRDDL documents don't elaborate on this 'schema  
> annotation' use case in as much detail as I think it deserves but I  
> expect this issue will be addressed in future work. An exploration  
> of this 'schema annotation' approach using GRDDL in a different  
> context is here
> - http://www.w3.org/2003/g/cc/demo
> hmm... not sure this is enough to go on in and of itself :( but it  
> may be useful.
>> I've spoken with the OpenDocument group about an RDF embedding  
>> standard and they're thinking about it but haven't come to any  
>> firm proposal. I also asked Norm Walsh about it a few months ago  
>> and he had it on his issue list for DocBook, but again I'm not yet  
>> aware of a definitive solution. For HL7-CDA, things are hazy right  
>> now.
>> Daniel, I'd be interested in talking over details with you when  
>> I'm out in Stanford.
> The real challenge is modeling the semantics of HL7 and creating  
> the appropriate transformations. Please report back any discussions  
> to this list as I (along with many others it seems :) am interested  
> in this area.
> --
> eric miller                              http://www.w3.org/people/em/
> semantic web activity lead               http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/
> w3c world wide web consortium            http://www.w3.org/
Received on Friday, 10 February 2006 14:42:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:52:25 UTC