RE: Clinical semantics and coverage in OBI / OBO - was Re: HCLS SW "Web Metro Map"

> Theoretically, it should mostly be a matter of names not semantics.
> At the top-most levels there seems to be a strong correspondence.
> Since, the POMR ontology only uses a handful of DOLCE terms, I'll take
>  a stab at trying to find equivalence in OBI / BFO.  This way, we can
> easily determine where these foundations do not account for the kind of
> semantics you need for clinical data (such as diagnostic actions, their
> interpretations, etc.).

[VK] I am not sure whether I would agree on this. Some times conceptualizations
can differ widely, for example the notion of a process across different domains.
It is much more than a matter of naming.

Interestingly this was triggered by your definition of process location which I
did not like (since I was viewing it from the perspective of a computational
process). 

I was wondering if you could try to find the correspondence in the context of a
use case probably involving process. For example, how about the following:

(A) Define the notion of disease as a biological process using BFO and DOLCE
primitives.
(B) Define the notion of disease as a clinical care process using BFO and DOLCE
primitives.

This will help create bridges across the HCLS domains? As posted earlier, the
wiki page is at:

http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLS/OntologyTaskForce/BFOProcessDefinitionDiscussion

Cheers,

---Vipul





The information transmitted in this electronic communication is intended only for the person or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this information in error, please contact the Compliance HelpLine at 800-856-1983 and properly dispose of this information.

Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2007 02:36:51 UTC