- From: <DAN.RUSSLER@ORACLE.COM>
- Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 15:11:52 +0000 (GMT)
- To: "Kashyap, Vipul" <VKASHYAP1@PARTNERS.ORG>, helen.chen@agfa.com
- Cc: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
- Message-ID: <15976056.1156691512359.JavaMail.oracle@web265.oracle.com>
Hi Vipul,
Excellent comments...It seems to me that an ontology that doesn't have a testable use case can never be judged useful or not useful for any kind of predictable search strategy.
Here is the use case I would like to explore:
"An RDF system has been put in place to navigate to healthcare resources stored in many systems including genetic resources, proteomic resources, and healthcare medical record resources. One of the healthcare resources is a CDA document, which itself has a URI. However, within the CDA document, are detailed resources expressed as HL7 RIM Acts which also carry URI's. I would like to navigate from my RDF-based navigation system to a specific kind of HL7 RIM Act, e.g. a family medical history clinical statement, within a specific kind of CDA document. "
I'm sure this use case could be better written with a little time. However, is this the kind of use case you were looking for?
Dan Russler, M.D.
VP Clinical Informatics
Oracle
(VM) 404-439-5983
--- Original Message ---
I agree with Helen. In general, we need to be very careful about translating from the UML to the OWL meta-model.
It is quite likely that there are multiple alternatives in OWL for representing the same UML construct and we would
probably need best practices for the same.
Towards this end, it would be very useful to understand the use cases and requirements for which this translation is required.
The questions we need to answer are:
- What is the value of this translation? May be for the particular use case and requirement, it?s not really useful?
- What are the assumptions behind the use cases? Typically these assumptions would help determine a more appropriate
and accurate translation.
RIM appears to be more of a ?meta-model? rather than an ?ontology? and the semantics of the various constructs have not been
defined accurately. There has been a lot of discussion. Also, one needs to understand issues related to whether we are building an information model
for HL7 message content or an information model for persistence to be mapped into a database schema or one for decision support?
I would strongly recommend that this exercise, which is very valuable, should be carried out in the context of a well defined use
case. Doing it in the abstract could result in making arbitrary modeling decisions which may detract from the usefulness of the
translation.
Cheers,
---Vipul
From: public-semweb-lifesci-request@w3.org [mailto:public-semweb-lifesci-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of helen.chen@agfa.com
Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 5:13 PM
To: DAN.RUSSLER@ORACLE.COM
Cc: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Subject: Implications and Issues in Converting UML to RDF/OWL When Constructing HL7 RIM Ontology
Hi, Dan
Given the detailed description of HL7 RIM and Domain Vocabulary, it is quite tempting to generate the RIM ontology directly from some kind of conversion scheme between UML and RDF/OWL , preferably some automated tools/scripts.
I assume you must aware some similar efforts in generating RIM ontology. One such ontology is made by Bhavna Orgun (http://www.ics.mq.edu.au/~borgun/Software.html).
However, when examining closely the fundamental theories behind UML (OO) and RDF/OWL (Model theory), you will find that the direct translation from UML to RDF/OWL is not so straightforward as it seems. For example:
1. Mapping UML classes to RDF classes
UML class hierarchy is shown in class diagram. In a typical OO fashion, if class B is the subClass of class A, all attributes of A will be "inherited" by B. Furthermore, class B often will have additional attributes that impose further restrictions on B. RIM class diagram only shows those subclasses that have additional attributes compare to their super-classes. Translation of RIM class diagram into RDF/OWL classes and subclasses can be quite misleading. I find a more adequate categorization is the class type list in the domain vocabulary, for example, for classification of the act class, I have used the domain ActClass ("A code specifying the major type of Act that this act-instance represents" ).
2. Mapping UML attributes RDF properties
In OO, all attributes of a class will be inherited by its subclasses. In RDF/OWL, there is not such "inheritance", such that
{?A ?P ?X. ?B rdfs:subClassOf ?A} => {?B ?P ?X}
(the above rule does not exist in OWL semantics)
Some semantics in OO inheritance can be mapped to RDF/OWL using restrictions, but great care must be applied not to over-restrict your ontology. Maybe we can look at some details during one of our Tcon.
3. Mapping "relationship classes" to RDF property
There are "relationship classes" in RIM, such as ActRelationship class, RoleLink class. These classes are used to state relationship between two acts, or two roles. In OO, they are designed as classes, and can be easily mapped to the ER model for database, in order to accommodate one-to-many relationship. In RDF/OWL, it is natural to model them as properties, and their types as sub-properties. This is how they are modelled in our RIM ontology mentioned in my previous email.
These are a few points I have encountered during my exercise of constructing RIM Ontology.
I am copying HCLS list on this subject, hope to hear from other people's experience in "converting RIM ontology from UML" or from UML->OWL in other domains. Many domain knowledge is captured in UML type of models and diagrams. If we can find a good way to convert these domain knowledge in UML to OWL, I believe it would offer some value for Informatics as general.
Kind regards.
Helen
http://www.agfa.com/w3c/hchen
DAN.RUSSLER@ORACLE.COM
08/25/2006 12:34 PM ToHelen Chen/AMPJB/AGFA@AGFA
cc
SubjectRE: invitation for next ACPP call
Thanks for the welcome Helen. I hope to learn a lot and perhaps, at least, contribute a little.
I've been exploring transforms from UML to RDF and have found some resources. Do you have anything written on mappings or transforms from the RIM to RDF expressions?
Dan Russler, M.D.
VP Clinical Informatics
Oracle
(VM) 404-439-5983
--- Original Message ---
Hi, Dan and the group
My sincere apology to all with regard to this week's ACPP Tcon. I was on vacation the whole week and did plan to attend the Tcon on Tuesday. Due to a health problem of my father, I ended up only getting back to my computer this morning.
Welcome, Dan, to this group. It is so good to hear your interest in working on HL7 RIM ontology. We have the same intention and worked on a draft which you can find at ACPP group's attachments section:
http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLS/ACPPTaskForce?action=AttachFile
You can download the RIMV3OWL.zip file which contains all files of RIM ontology in protege. I had some design consideration and choices made during the design and implementation of this ontology and discussed them once with Chimizie. I am very much looking forward to hearing your comments and working together.
I hope to talk with all of you on our next Tcon at 3pm, Tuesday, August 29.
Kind regards.
Helen
http://www.agfa.com/w3c/hchen
"Davide Zaccagnini" <davide@landcglobal.com>
08/22/2006 08:27 AM
To<DAN.RUSSLER@ORACLE.COM>, <ogbujic@bio.ri.ccf.org>, <thongsermeier@partners.org>, Helen Chen/AMPJB/AGFA@AGFA, <Alfredo.Morales@cerebra.com>, "'Brandt, Sam \(MED US\)'" <sam.brandt@siemens.com>
cc
SubjectRE: invitation for next ACPP call
Dan,
Here are the details
SW_HCLS(ACPP)
SW Life Sciences IG
Tuesdays
3:00pm-4:15pm
+1.617.761.6200, conference code 2277 ("ACPP")
Regards
Davide
-----Original Message-----
From: DAN.RUSSLER@ORACLE.COM [mailto:DAN.RUSSLER@ORACLE.COM]
Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 6:18 PM
To: ogbujic@bio.ri.ccf.org; thongsermeier@partners.org; helen.chen@agfa.com;
Alfredo.Morales@cerebra.com; davide@landcglobal.com; Brandt, Sam (MED US)
Subject: Re: invitation for next ACPP call
Thanks!...I'm looking forward to working with this group.
Can someone send call-in information?
Dan Russler, M.D.
VP Clinical Informatics
Oracle
(VM) 404-439-5983
--- Original Message ---
>
> I second that!
> Welcome Dan!!
>
> -Sam
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hongsermeier, Tonya M.,M.D. <THONGSERMEIER@PARTNERS.ORG>
> To: Davide Zaccagnini <davide@landcglobal.com>; helen.chen@agfa.com
> <helen.chen@agfa.com>; DAN.RUSSLER@ORACLE.COM <DAN.RUSSLER@ORACLE.COM>;
> Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@bio.ri.ccf.org>; Alfredo Morales
> <Alfredo.Morales@cerebra.com>; Brandt, Sam (MED US)
> Sent: Mon Aug 21 17:54:34 2006
> Subject: RE: invitation for next ACPP call
>
> Davide
>
> This is fantastic, Dan, welcome to the team
>
> Best
>
> Tonya
>
>
>
> Tonya Hongsermeier, MD, MBA
> Corporate Manager,
> Clinical Knowledge Management and Decision Support
>
> Partners HealthCare System
> Clinical Informatics Research and Development
> 93 Worcester Street, PO Box 81905
> Wellesley, MA 02481
> P: 781.416.9219 Mobile: 617.717.8711
> Fax: 781.416.8912
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Davide Zaccagnini [mailto:davide@landcglobal.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 3:00 PM
> To: helen.chen@agfa.com; DAN.RUSSLER@ORACLE.COM; Hongsermeier,
> Tonya M.,M.D.; Chimezie Ogbuji; Alfredo Morales; sam.brandt@siemens.com
> Subject: invitation for next ACPP call
>
>
>
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> I would like to invite to our next ACPP call Dan Russler, VP
> of clinical informatics at Oracle. Dan is interested in
> approaches to map HL7 RIM to RDF and in modeling clinical
> protocols with semantic technologies.
>
>
>
> Dan,
>
> here is the link to our wiki page where we can start looking
> at the work we have done so far
http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLS/ACPPTaskForce#preview
>
>
>
> Are we ok for next Tuesday at 3pm?
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> Davide
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Davide Zaccagnini, MD, MS
>
> Product Manager, Medical Informatician
>
> + 1 617 864 1031 (Office)
>
> + 1 617 642 7472 (Cell)
>
> davide@landcglobal.com
>
> www.landcglobal.com
>
>
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
> This message and any included attachments are from Siemens
> Medical Solutions
> USA, Inc. and are intended only for the addressee(s).
> The information contained herein may include trade secrets or
> privileged or
> otherwise confidential information. Unauthorized review,
> forwarding, printing,
> copying, distributing, or using such information is strictly
> prohibited and may
> be unlawful. If you received this message in error, or have
> reason to believe
> you are not authorized to receive it, please promptly delete
> this message and
> notify the sender by e-mail with a copy to
Central.SecurityOffice@siemens.com
>
>
> Thank you
>
>
Received on Sunday, 27 August 2006 15:12:43 UTC