W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > January 2007

Re: Versioning vs Temporal modeling of Patient State

From: Trish Whetzel <whetzel@pcbi.upenn.edu>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 16:58:02 -0500 (EST)
To: "Kashyap, Vipul" <VKASHYAP1@PARTNERS.ORG>
cc: Nigam Haresh Shah <nigam@stanford.edu>, kc28 <kei.cheung@yale.edu>, Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, w3c semweb hcls <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0701111651110.25290@hera.pcbi.upenn.edu>

>> Have an example for this one: If the instance is of a the class "Tumor"
>> then
>> on giving treatment it changes in size, shape etc, and might ultimately
>> disappear. On each visit we are observing a different version of the tumor
>> instance [in Tom].
>
> [VK] Clearly there is a longitudinal aspect to this as the state of the tumor
> changes over time....
>
> This could be modeled in two ways:
>
> Tumor1.state = X at time T1
> Tumor1.state = Y at time T2
> ...
> Tumor1.state = "Non-existent" at time Tn
>
> Essentially you are modeling state as a multivalued property or as a ternary
> relationship (Tumor, state, Time)
>
> Alternatively,
>
> Tumor1, v1.state = X
> Tumor1, v2.state = Y
> ...
> Tumor1, vN.state = "Non-existent"
>
>
> IMHO, the former representation conveys more information and meaning...
> So, it may make sense not to confound versioning with temporal progression...
Yes, I agree. It seems as though the various states of the tumor can 
exist, but whether they are the same state over time is a different 
question. It is not as though the state 'non-existent' is replaced with 
another state with a new name, at least that is how I am thinking of 
versioning. The instance data to describe the state of the tumor is 
different based on some action, e.g. passing of time.

Trish
Received on Thursday, 11 January 2007 21:58:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:20:21 UTC