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

Re: Unique ID options

From: Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@bio.ri.ccf.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 11:14:32 -0500 (EST)
To: samwald@gmx.at
cc: "Forsberg, Kerstin L" <Kerstin.L.Forsberg@astrazeneca.com>, public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.60.0701291107000.29468@joplin.bio.ri.ccf.org>

On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Chimezie Ogbuji wrote:

> Consider that most current medical / patient records are time-oriented mostly 
> and rely on a time scale for disambiguation, so there wouldn't be any need to 
> say:
>   [ a cpr:patient-record ]
>     dol:part <urn:uuid:medical-record-db-20/26655>.
>     <urn:uuid:medical-record-db-20/26655> a cpr:clinical-description.
>
>
> When you can say
>
>   [ a cpr:patient-record ]
>     dol:part [ a cpr:clinical-description ].


Sorry, that should be:

    [ a cpr:patient-record ]
      dol:part <urn:uuid:medical-record-db-20/26655>.
      <urn:uuid:medical-record-db-20/26655> a cpr:clinical-description;
                                            dol:has-quality [ time:inXSDDate "1950-01-01"^^xsd:date ]
And

    [ a cpr:patient-record ]
      dol:part [ a cpr:clinical-description ] dol:has-quality [ time:inXSDDate "1950-01-01"^^xsd:date ]

Where the unique time stamp gives (at least the beginnings) of a mechanism 
for uniquely identifyin (via RDF query) the description in question.

Chimezie Ogbuji
Lead Systems Analyst
Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Cleveland Clinic Foundation
9500 Euclid Avenue/ W26
Cleveland, Ohio 44195
Office: (216)444-8593
ogbujic@ccf.org
Received on Monday, 29 January 2007 16:14:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:20:22 UTC