W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > May 2014

RE: Propose an HL7 work group on RDF for Semantic Interoperability?

From: Vipul Kashyap <kashyap.vipul@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 21:43:05 -0400
To: "'David Booth'" <david@dbooth.org>, "'Renato Iannella'" <ri@semanticidentity.com>
Cc: "'Anthony Mallia'" <amallia@edmondsci.com>, "'Prud'hommeaux, Eric'" <eric@w3.org>, "'Claude Nanjo'" <cnanjo@cognitivemedicine.com>, "'Richards, Rafael M.'" <Rafael.Richards@va.gov>, "'w3c semweb HCLS'" <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>, <kashyap.vipul@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <002301cf6f15$ded5e5b0$9c81b110$@gmail.com>
Agree with David - that HCLS has done a good job in raising awareness in the
W3C community - with informal participation from HL7 regulars. However, I
think we need some sort of a deeper collaboration - to achieve impact.

Another body to involve is ONC - which is likely to be influential - Not
sure - but was ONC also involved with the PCAST report?



-----Original Message-----
From: David Booth [mailto:david@dbooth.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 9:31 PM
To: Renato Iannella
Cc: Anthony Mallia; Prud'hommeaux, Eric; Claude Nanjo; Richards, Rafael M.
(Rafael.Richards@va.gov); w3c semweb HCLS
Subject: Re: Propose an HL7 work group on RDF for Semantic Interoperability?

Hi Renato,

On 05/13/2014 08:55 PM, Renato Iannella wrote:
> On 14 May 2014, at 00:54, David Booth <david@dbooth.org> wrote:
>> I was at the HL7 meetings last week, and the idea arose of proposing 
>> an HL7 work group on RDF for Semantic Interoperability.
>> I took the initiative to draft a possible charter.
> Have you considered operating this as a W3C Community Group (easy to 
> start, more SW input..etc). And when there are some more concrete 
> deliverables, take them to HL7 (or elsewhere) for official 
> "standardisation".

I think a key motivation is to start engaging the HL7 community on this. 
  I think the existing W3C HCLS group has done a good job in the W3C
community, but I personally think it would be very helpful to start raising
the visibility within HL7.  That's my take anyway.  I don't know if others
might see it differently.

Oh, I should have said, this is intended to be a HL7-W3C collaboration. 
  EricP was explaining on the call today that usually there are intellectual
property (IP) policy issues in collaborating between standards
organizations, but HL7 happens to have essentially the same IP policy as
W3C, so we don't have that barrier in this case.

Received on Wednesday, 14 May 2014 01:43:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:21:39 UTC