- From: Lloyd McKenzie <lloyd@lmckenzie.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2014 16:12:17 -0700
- To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Cc: Grahame Grieve <grahame@healthintersections.com.au>, w3c semweb HCLS <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>, "its@lists.hl7.org" <its@lists.hl7.org>
- Message-ID: <CAJ860JKpxRZwtkNqUA7_QzhD28QjLvrZ5wHwyVqU+SkSREj2hw@mail.gmail.com>
I think that any ontology we create will have to be produceable in an automated fashion from the FHIR artifacts. Any introduction of hand-editing would be unacceptable from a maintainability and consistency perspective. So we're looking at mechanical, no matter what. The question is what the mechanical outputs would be. -------------------------------------- Lloyd McKenzie +1-780-993-9501 Note: Unless explicitly stated otherwise, the opinions and positions expressed in this e-mail do not necessarily reflect those of my clients nor those of the organizations with whom I hold governance positions. On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 1:51 PM, David Booth <david@dbooth.org> wrote: > Possibly a dream ontology would link to more other ontologies, such as > upper level ontologies, but other than that I view it as more of a > stylistic difference: more oriented toward a human conceptualization that > is natural to express in RDF (i.e., reflecting RDF's natural style). > > But one problem is that the whole notion of a dream ontology is very > subjective, and this means that it is apt to take a lot more work to reach > convergence on it. That is why I think it is important to prioritize a > mechanical ontology first, so that we can progress as rapidly. If at some > later point we wish -- and we are able -- to converge on a dream ontology > then that's great, and it could complement the mechanical ontology for > those who wish to use it. But I think it would be a big mistake to try for > that at the outset. > > Again, the distinction between mechanical ontology and dream ontology is > qualitative, fuzzy and subjective: to the extent that we can make a > mechanical ontology that is human friendly and natural to RDF, that would > of course be ideal. I just want to guard against going down a potential > rat hole from the start. :) > > David > > On 12/08/2014 02:24 PM, Grahame Grieve wrote: > >> can you explain your dream ontology more? what sort of things does it do? >> >> Grahame >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 6:01 AM, David Booth <david@dbooth.org >> <mailto:david@dbooth.org>> wrote: >> >> Hi Lloyd, >> >> On 12/08/2014 01:35 PM, Lloyd McKenzie wrote: >> >> I think we need to define our objectives for the RDF >> representation. >> Mine are as follows: >> >> >> Great list! My comments . . . >> >> >> 1. It must be possible to round-trip from XML/JSON through RDF >> representation >> >> >> +1 >> >> * This includes retaining information about order of repeating >> elements >> >> >> Is the order of repeating elements semantically significant in FHIR? >> I.e., would it affect or use of the interpretation of the >> information? If not, then why do you view this as important? >> (Playing devil's advocate here, to elicit the rationale.) >> >> * Needs to allow for extensions where-ever they can appear, >> including >> simple types (date, boolean, etc.) >> >> >> +1 >> >> 2. We want to be able to represent instances as RDF >> >> >> +1 >> >> and Profiles as OWL/RDFS >> >> +0.9. I think the profiles MUST be represented in some form of RDF, >> but whether it is done using OWL, RDFS or some combination of OWL, >> RDFS and something else (SKOS?) I think should be a judgement call >> that is made as we go along. >> >> 3. Syntax needs to be "safe" when dealing with modifier extensions >> 4. Syntax should support vocabulary bindings to code, Coding and >> CodeableConcept - including dealing with extensible value sets and >> multi-code system value sets >> 5. Syntax should enforce constraints that are representable in >> RDF (i.e. >> schema constraints, regular expressions, etc.) >> >> >> Can you explain what you mean by syntax in the above? For example, >> if Turtle is used to serialize the RDF, what would the above points >> mean? >> >> 6. In the RDFS/OWL, should expose at least minimal annotation >> information for display >> >> >> +1 >> >> BTW, there's another distinction that Eric Prud'hommeaux used to >> distinguish between different ontology styles or goals. I think he >> referred to one style as a "mechanical" ontology, which might be >> fairly directly derived from the FHIR spec and is oriented mainly >> toward ease of round tripping between RDF and XML or JSON. The >> other style is a "dream" ontology, which is friendlier and more >> natural for humans to view and may take more work to converge upon. >> The two are not mutually exclusive, of course, but in prioritizing >> our work effort I'm of the opinion that we should FIRST go for the >> mechanical ontology, and once we've got that sufficiently nailed >> down, we could try to figure out a dream ontology, with the ability >> to automatically translate instance data between the two. >> >> Thanks, >> David Booth >> >> ******************************__**************************** >> **__*********************** >> Manage subscriptions - http://www.HL7.org/listservice >> View archives - http://lists.HL7.org/read/?__forum=its >> <http://lists.HL7.org/read/?forum=its> >> Unsubscribe - >> http://www.HL7.org/tools/__unsubscribe.cfm?email=grahame@ >> __healthintersections.com.au&__list=its >> <http://www.HL7.org/tools/unsubscribe.cfm?email=grahame@ >> healthintersections.com.au&list=its> >> >> Terms of use - >> http://www.HL7.org/myhl7/__managelistservs.cfm?ref=nav#__listrules >> <http://www.HL7.org/myhl7/managelistservs.cfm?ref=nav#listrules> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> ----- >> http://www.healthintersections.com.au / >> grahame@healthintersections.com.au >> <mailto:grahame@healthintersections.com.au> / +61 411 867 065 >> >> ************************************************************ >> *********************** >> Manage your subscriptions <http://www.HL7.org/listservice> | View the >> archives <http://lists.HL7.org/read/?forum=its> | Unsubscribe >> <http://www.HL7.org/tools/unsubscribe.cfm?email=david@dbooth.org&list=its >> > >> | Terms of use >> <http://www.HL7.org/myhl7/managelistservs.cfm?ref=nav#listrules> >> >>
Received on Monday, 8 December 2014 23:13:07 UTC