RE: Proposed RDF FHIR syntax feedback

Marc,
You are absolutely right that we need to organize the topics. I had created a set of topics for mapping at
http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=FHIR_RDF_Mapping and the topic “Modeling language and Serialization syntax” now has its own page where I have copied the discussion and also linked to a document comparing some of the syntaxes at
http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=File:Comparison_of_Semantic_Web_serialization_syntaxes.pdf


The paper does not come to a conclusion – RDF/XML is the most verbose and is supported by the most tools I believe. Some people like Turtle. The Protégé expression editor uses Manchester Syntax so I am used to it.

Tony Mallia
EDMOND SCIENTIFIC COMPANY (ESC)



From: Marc Twagirumukiza [mailto:marc.twagirumukiza@agfa.com]
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2015 5:54 PM
To: Anthony Mallia
Cc: Lloyd McKenzie; Jim McCusker; David Booth; HL7 ITS; owner-its@lists.hl7.org; w3c semweb HCLS
Subject: RE: Proposed RDF FHIR syntax feedback


Hi David,
Sorry to jump again into this discussion.
Is it possible to put such discussion in a kind of issue tracker/wiki/or something else? With 3 columns: the topic, the discussion thread, and the conclusion (where possible)?
The purpose would be to keep all arguments in classified way according the topic but utmost to pick one or 2 conclusions points from each thread.
Just thinking loud.
F.eg<http://F.eg>.This is a nice informative discussion which can help the future "faq" and keeping one conclusion from it can prevent having the same discussion again.
This holds also for other threads.

Kind Regards,

Marc Twagirumukiza.

Sent via IBM Notes Traveler
iPad Device

Anthony Mallia --- RE: Proposed RDF FHIR syntax feedback ---

From:

"Anthony Mallia" <amallia@edmondsci.com<mailto:amallia@edmondsci.com>>

To:

"Lloyd McKenzie" <lloyd@lmckenzie.com<mailto:lloyd@lmckenzie.com>>, "Jim McCusker" <mccusj@rpi.edu<mailto:mccusj@rpi.edu>>

Cc:

"Marc Twagirumukiza" <marc.twagirumukiza@agfa.com<mailto:marc.twagirumukiza@agfa.com>>, "David Booth" <david@dbooth.org<mailto:david@dbooth.org>>, "HL7 ITS" <its@lists.hl7.org<mailto:its@lists.hl7.org>>, owner-its@lists.hl7.org<mailto:owner-its@lists.hl7.org>, "w3c semweb HCLS" <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org<mailto:public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>>

Date:

Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:20

Subject:

RE: Proposed RDF FHIR syntax feedback

________________________________

Lloyd,
RDF, RDFS and OWL can all be expressed in RDF/XML. I am using it all the time out of Protégé.

Tony


From: Lloyd McKenzie [mailto:lloyd@lmckenzie.com]
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2015 2:17 PM
To: Jim McCusker
Cc: Anthony Mallia; Marc Twagirumukiza; David Booth; HL7 ITS; owner-its@lists.hl7.org<mailto:owner-its@lists.hl7.org>; w3c semweb HCLS
Subject: Re: Proposed RDF FHIR syntax feedback

Where we'll have a particular challenge is where the RDF and OWL representations can both be expressed using the same sytnax.  It may be that the solution there is to return both the instance and class information.  Is there a distinct mime-type for JSON-LD from regular JSON?


Lloyd McKenzie
Consultant, Information Technology Services
Gevity Consulting Inc.

 E: -Your data has been truncated.