Re: New proposal: health & medical extensions to schema.org

relevantSpecialtyMedicalSpecialty<http://schemaorg-medicalext.appspot.com/MedicalSpecialty>If
applicable, a medical specialty in which this term is relevant.


For the above  MedicalEntity<http://schemaorg-medicalext.appspot.com/MedicalEntity>
,
I would advise replacing "term" with "entity".  A potential snafu there.

On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Aaron Brown <abbrown@google.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> As I’ve alluded to before on this list (
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2012Feb/0053.html),
> over the past 6 months, a few of us at Google and other institutions have
> been working on a set of schema.org extensions to cover the health and
> medical domain. After several internal iterations and a lot of feedback
> from initial reviewers (including the US NCBI; physicians at Harvard,
> Stanford, and Duke; the major search engines; and a few health web sites),
> we think we have a solid draft and would like to open it for public
> feedback as a step toward incorporating it into schema.org.
>
> The proposed health/medical schema can be found at
> http://schemaorg-medicalext.appspot.com/ which includes an introduction
> as well as a snapshot of the type hierarchy and several markup examples.
> It's also linked on the w3 wiki at
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/MedicalHealthProposal. As you'll see
> this is a substantial piece of work, so we’d welcome feedback and detailed
> review comments on the specifics (please follow up to this email).
>
> For those interested in more background on the approach: our goal is to
> create schema that webmasters and content publishers can use to mark up
> health and medical content on the web, with a particular focus on markup
> that will help patients, physicians, and generally health-interested
> consumers find relevant health information via search. The scope of
> coverage for the schema is broad, and is intended to cover both consumer-
> and professionally-targeted health and medical web content (of course, any
> particular piece of online health/medical content is likely to use only a
> subset of the schema). We’ve worked with physicians, consumer web sites,
> and government health organizations to get input into the key topics and
> properties to model and to refine the schema structure and type/property
> documentation.
>
> Note that it is explicitly not our goal to replace the many very good and
> comprehensive medical ontologies, meta-thesaurii, or controlled
> vocabularies that have been created over the years; our focus has been
> instead on creating complementary, lightweight markup that surfaces the
> existence of and relationships between entities in health/medical web
> pages. When other ontologies and/or controlled vocabularies are available,
> our proposed schema can link to and take advantage of them, e.g. via the
> code property of MedicalEntity<http://schemaorg-medicalext.appspot.com/MedicalEntity>.
> It is also not an initial goal to support automated reasoning, medical
> records coding, or genomic tagging, as these would require substantially
> more detailed (and hence high barrier-to-entry) modeling and markup; they
> could be considered for future extensions.
>
> We look forward to your feedback!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Aaron Brown (Google)
>
> --
> Aaron Brown | Senior Product Manager | Google, Inc. | New York, NY
>



-- 
-Thad
http://www.freebase.com/view/en/thad_guidry