Re: FHIR on schema.org

>
>
> It seems to me that privacy needs to be addressed at the level of
> protocols and policies.  What are you suggesting relevant to
> vocabularies, such as schema.org?
>

well, the vocabularies often need to support this. The most relevant
thing is to tag the information with consent to share information (an
active top in FHIR right now). And we should not assume that
web = public - access to the content might be gated by Heart based
OAuth, for instance. in this context, consent to share beyond the
immediate context is pretty interesting.


>
> > For example, we already have http://hl7.org/fhir/MedicationOrder We
> > do we now need (and maintain): http://schema.org/MedicationOrder ??
>
> Great question.  There is a huge need for standards convergence, to
> facilitate semantic interoperability


yep, but I think you ducked Renato's question. Where you already
have content, then mapping, ok. but it seems retrograde to clone
content so you can map back to it?

Unless we can set up to auto-generate schema.org content, but that
sounds most difficult to me.

Grahame