W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > April 2008

Re: An argument for bridging information models and ontologies at the syntactic level

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 09:35:38 -0500
Message-Id: <p06230910c4364a814003@[]>
To: dan.russler@oracle.com
Cc: "Kashyap, Vipul" <VKASHYAP1@PARTNERS.ORG>, Samson Tu <swt@stanford.edu>, public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org, public-hcls-coi@w3.org, Elkin.Peter@MAYO.EDU
At 10:46 AM -0400 4/21/08, Dan Russler wrote:
>Peter and Vipul...See below...dan
>Kashyap, Vipul wrote:
>>IMHO, codes don't represent classes in some information model. An 
>>information model has classes like Observation, whose instances are 
>>clinical statements made by some entity (person or machine). I 
>>think information model is "meta" in the sense that its instances 
>>are statements  
>>[VK] This the reason I think theHL7 is a meta-model rather than an 
>>Information Model. Of course this depends on the viewpoint you take 
>>and the information architecture you adopt.
><dan> With apologies to Peter in case I misrepresented your SOA 
>presentation...Last week, Peter Elkin of Mayo Clinic delivered a 
>presentation where he called the HL7 RIM a "first order ontology" 
>because of the abstraction level of the RIM. He called the models 
>derived from the RIM, e.g. analytic models, patient care document 
>models like CDA, etc, "second order ontology" because they add a 
>layer of concreteness to the abstractions of the RIM, i.e. an object 
>with classCode of observation and moodCode of order becomes an 
>"observation order object" with neither a classCode nor a moodCode. 
>Finally, the coding systems themselves support the concreteness of a 
>"third order ontology." For example, the SNOMED concept becomes an 
>object itself without a code attribute, moodCode attribute, or 
>classCode attribute, e.g. a WBC order. />

AAArgh, can I plead that we do NOT use this terminology in this way? 
The "first/second/higher-order" terminology already has a firmly 
established and very precise use to refer to types of logic, and 
hence of ontology languages. Just don't say 'order'. Use some other 
word, please. Thanks.

Pat Hayes

IHMC		(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502			(850)291 0667    cell
http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes      phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us
Received on Thursday, 24 April 2008 14:36:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:20:33 UTC