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

Re: FHIR on schema.org

From: Renato Iannella <r@iannel.la>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2016 10:16:29 +1000
Message-Id: <A228585D-B2CE-4577-94DE-EF7F1018C1AA@iannel.la>
To: Marc Twagirumukiza <marc.twagirumukiza@agfa.com>, "its@lists.hl7.org" <its@lists.HL7.org>, w3c semweb HCLS <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>

> On 26 May 2016, at 17:42, Marc Twagirumukiza <marc.twagirumukiza@agfa.com> wrote:
> 
> However it's the responsibility of every one to make its data public or not. 
> This doesn't prevent us to provide a way of expressing data (for those who want to do so) with FHIR standard using schema.org <http://schema.org/> 

I think the onus is on the spec development side to show how privacy issues are addressed (mitigated).
Hence, using “Privacy-By-Design” principles [1] (for example).

The current FHIR core spec uses a secure protocol for exchange of data (ie good design) for XML/JSON.
But if we then say - here is how you encode FHIR data in public web pages and publish schema.org URIs - then we must be able to specifically address these privacy concerns. (I imagine a lot of Privacy Advocacy groups would be interested if they saw that.)

> Just for your example, we are already expressing our internal healthcare data (and EHR data) using schema.org <http://schema.org/> (although they are not public). 
> This has a benefit when we need to share such data with another APIs and there HL7 FHIR comes in as a standard. 


Does that mean you are encoding FHIR Data using RDFa/Microdata? (and using schema.org URIs for all the FHIR concepts?)

Cheers - Renato

[1] https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/NOTE-app-privacy-bp-20120703/ <https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/NOTE-app-privacy-bp-20120703/>
Received on Friday, 27 May 2016 00:17:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 May 2016 00:17:09 UTC