Re: Summary of today's teleconference: JSON-LD and FHIR Ontology requirements

We might want to record a couple of issues around the points that were 
raised on today's call, to ensure that we track and address them:
[[
ISSUE: If non-FHIR data is added to some FHIR RDF data, what should 
happen to that extra information when converting back to FHIR XML/JSON?

ISSUE: How should the FHIR RDF handle instance data that is invalid 
according to a profile with which it is tagged, given that some 
recipients may still choose to process that data?  (If it is merely 
treated as a logical inconsistency by a reasoner then that may interfere 
with the ability to usefully reason in other ways about the data.)
]]

David

On 12/30/2014 02:30 PM, David Booth wrote:
> On today's teleconference we briefly discussed the potential for using
> JSON-LD for FHIR instance data, so that the same serialization could be
> processed both as regular JSON and as RDF.  Lloyd believes that if we
> able to achieve this merely by the addition of an @context link, then it
> could become a part of the standard FHIR JSON serialization.  David
> Booth and Scott Marshall offered to investigate the potential use of
> JSON-LD for this purpose.  Others are invited also.
>
> We then discussed draft FHIR ontology requirements (#1 and #3)
> http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=FHIR_Ontology_Requirements
> There was general agreement about #3 (the need for round tripping), but
> discussion about whether to merge #1 and #3, and whether and RDF
> representation could be allowed to carry more information than a FHIR
> XML/JSON representation.
>
> There was also discussion about what should happen if FHIR instance data
> is tagged with a profile, but that instance data is invalid according to
> that profile.  Lloyd remarked that it would be invalid, but a recipient
> may nonetheless choose to process it in some way, and this may
> complicate the desired treatment in the RDF semantics (rather than
> merely being treated as a logical inconsistency).
>
> David requested specific proposals for wording changes to the draft
> requirements, to help speed closure.
>
> The complete log of the meeting:
> http://www.w3.org/2014/12/30-hcls-minutes.html
>
> Next week Frederik Malfait will review the PhUSE work.
>
> David Booth

Received on Tuesday, 30 December 2014 19:34:08 UTC