W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > April 2016

Re: Question on FHIR references - relative and absolute URIs

From: Robert Hausam <rrhausam@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 21:54:13 -0600
Message-ID: <CA+KThc8QkyNEcbJJmidxDwU2zsAos12BquZ8GBZzGDQs5vqeHg@mail.gmail.com>
To: tlukasik@exnihilum.com
Cc: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, Lloyd McKenzie <lloyd@lmckenzie.com>, Grahame Grieve <grahame@healthintersections.com.au>, "its@lists.hl7.org" <its@lists.hl7.org>, w3c semweb HCLS <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
Right.  We always had stated that we must be able to get back "the same
thing".  And signature is a means to verify that.

Rob

On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 6:05 PM, <tlukasik@exnihilum.com> wrote:

> >> "It has been mentioned before, as a way to clarify what qualifies as
> successful round tripping."
>
> David..
>
> I wasn't doubting that it was ever mentioned. My concern was that we may
> not be keeping the additional challenge that signing introduces in mind
> when evaluating and testing the round tripping of our prototype RDF
> instances.
>
> I think that if we *were* doing that, we would have been aware of what
> Lloyd pointed out, and have been able to answer our own question RE the
> preservation of absolute and relative URIs.
>
> TJL
>
> ---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
>
> Subject: Re: Question on FHIR references - relative and absolute URIs
> From: "David Booth" <david@dbooth.org>
> Date: Tue, April 26, 2016 4:05 pm
> To: tlukasik@exnihilum.com
> Cc: "Lloyd McKenzie" <lloyd@lmckenzie.com>
> "Grahame Grieve" <grahame@healthintersections.com.au>
>
> "its@lists.hl7.org" <its@lists.hl7.org>
> "w3c semweb HCLS" <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > On 04/26/2016 03:44 PM, tlukasik@exnihilum.com wrote:
> >> >> "If we want the RDF to be an equal sibling to xml and JSON then
> >> round tripping needs to be signature safe."
> >> David..
> >> Lloyd's comment points out the need for a significant and non-trivial
> >> "uptick" in the level of care that will have to be taken when generating
> >> RDF.
> >> I certainly haven't been to every single FHIR RDF meeting (so please
> >> correct me if I'm wrong), but I don't recall "signature safety" being
> >> discussed much (if at all) when we've discussed aspects of round
> tripping.
> >
> > It has been mentioned before, as a way to clarify what qualifies as
> > successful round tripping. Successful round tripping means getting back
> > "the same thing" if you convert from one FHIR serialization to another
> > and back again. But in deciding what we mean by "the same thing" one
> > might not expect something like whitespace differences to count as
> > consequential differences, whereas other changes definitely should be
> > considered important. The digital signature criteria provide a way to
> > arbitrate between important and unimportant differences.
> >
> > David
> >
> >> TJL
> >>
> >> ---------------------------- Original Message
> ----------------------------
> >> Subject: Re: Question on FHIR references - relative and absolute URIs
> >>
> From: "Lloyd McKenzie" <lloyd@lmckenzie.com>
> >> Date: Tue, April 26, 2016 3:00 pm
> >> To: "Grahame Grieve" <grahame@healthintersections.com.au>
> >> Cc: "David Booth" <david@dbooth.org>
> >> "its@lists.hl7.org" <its@lists.hl7.org>
> >> "w3c semweb HCLS" <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
> >>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> > If we want the RDF to be an equal sibling to xml and JSON then round
> >> > tripping needs to be signature safe. At the moment, that means
> retaining
> >> > absolute vs. relative references.
> >> >
> >> > On Tuesday, April 26, 2016, Grahame Grieve <
> >> > grahame@healthintersections.com.au> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> well, this is tricky. technically, it's not strictly required, but
> >> it's a
> >> >> lossy transform (lossy in both ways, in fact). One of the
> attractions of
> >> >> fhir;reference for me is that you can have an absolute reference for
> RDF
> >> >> and preserve the original fhir url
> >> >>
> >> >> Grahame
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 3:01 AM, David Booth <david@dbooth.org
> >> >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','david@dbooth.org');>> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Grahame and/or Lloyd,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> In today's FHIR RDF teleconference, a question came up about
> >> relative and
> >> >>> absolute URIs in FHIR references.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Must absolute and relative references be round tripped as is? I.e.,
> do
> >> >>> we need to maintain the distinction between relative and absolute
> >> >>> references when round tripping, or can relative URIs be turned into
> >> >>> absolute URIs and vice versa?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I did not see any mention of normalizing references in the
> >> discussion of
> >> >>> Canonical JSON:
> >> >>> https://hl7-fhir.github.io/json.html
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Thanks,
> >> >>> David Booth
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> -----
> >> >> http://www.healthintersections.com.au /
> >> grahame@healthintersections.com.au
> >> >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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=lloyd@lmckenzie.com&list=its
> >
> >> >> | Terms of use
> >> >> <http://www.HL7.org/myhl7/managelistservs.cfm?ref=nav#listrules>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> >
> >> > *Lloyd McKenzie*, P.Eng.
> >> > Senior Consultant, Information Technology Services
> >> > Gevity Consulting Inc.
> >> >
> >> > E: lmckenzie@gevityinc.com
> >> > M: +1 587-334-1110 <1-587-334-1110>
> >> > W: gevityinc.com
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > *GEVITY**Informatics for a healthier world *
> >> >
> >> > CONFIDENTIALITY – This communication is confidential and for the
> >> exclusive
> >> > use of its intended recipients. If you have received this
> >> communication by
> >> > error, please notify the sender and delete the message without
> copying or
> >> > disclosing it*.*
> >> >
> >> > NOTE: Unless explicitly stated otherwise, the opinions and positions
> >> > expressed in this e-mail do not necessarily reflect those of my
> employer,
> >> > my clients nor the organizations with whom I hold governance positions
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> ***********************************************************************************
> >> > Manage subscriptions - http://www.HL7.org/listservice
> >> > View archives - http://lists.HL7.org/read/?forum=its
> >> > Unsubscribe -
> >>
> http://www.HL7.org/tools/unsubscribe.cfm?email=tlukasik@exnihilum.com&list=its
> >> > Terms of use -
> >> http://www.HL7.org/myhl7/managelistservs.cfm?ref=nav#listrules
> >>
> >
> >
> ***********************************************************************************
> > Manage subscriptions - http://www.HL7.org/listservice
> > View archives - http://lists.HL7.org/read/?forum=its
> > Unsubscribe -
> http://www.HL7.org/tools/unsubscribe.cfm?email=tlukasik@exnihilum.com&list=its
> > Terms of use -
> http://www.HL7.org/myhl7/managelistservs.cfm?ref=nav#listrules
> >
> >
>
>
> ***********************************************************************************
> 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=rrhausam@gmail.com&list=its>
> | Terms of use
> <http://www.HL7.org/myhl7/managelistservs.cfm?ref=nav#listrules>
>



-- 
Robert Hausam, MD
+1 (801) 949-1556
rrhausam@gmail.com
Received on Wednesday, 27 April 2016 03:55:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:21:57 UTC