- From: <helen.chen@agfa.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 16:26:46 -0500
- To: joshua.phillips@semanticbits.com
- Cc: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org, public-semweb-lifesci-request@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF029B1CAF.AEC8C75E-ON85257671.006AFFCD-85257671.0075D090@agfa.com>
Joshua The COI group has discussed two possible directions: 1. Expand the test cases and apply to more substantial clinical models and datasets. 2. Embed authentication rules and consent management policies into the mapping rules, and apply access control during the transformation of queries. Yes, we are looking for new use cases and more datasets to work with. For example, we would like to have use cases where there is misalignment, even conflicts between two different domain ontologies. We would also like to test where SPARQL "construct" is not enough and we need to introduce more expressive rules. caBIG has done lots of work in setting standards for interoperability. It would be a good area to work. We are looking forward to having you join this conservation. Helen Chen joshua phillips <joshua.phillips@semanticbits.com> Sent by: public-semweb-lifesci-request@w3.org 11/16/2009 11:55 AM To public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org cc Subject COI next steps Hi, What are the next steps for the Clinical Observations Interop group? Are you looking for new use cases and data sets to work with? I'm interested to explore how this work could be applied to data from applications developed in caBIG such as caTissue (biospecimen annotations), caArray (gene expression), caAERS (adverse events), and C3PR (eligibility criteria, patient registration, protocols). - Joshua
Received on Tuesday, 17 November 2009 21:27:20 UTC