- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2021 09:01:22 -0400
- To: "its@lists.hl7.org" <its@lists.HL7.org>, w3c semweb HCLS <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
We made a little more progress on issue 77 today, by eliminating options
4a and 4b:
https://github.com/w3c/hcls-fhir-rdf/issues/77
See also the summary of issue 77 options here:
https://tinyurl.com/issue77options
Minutes are here:
https://www.w3.org/2021/09/16-hcls-minutes.html
and also below in plain text.
Thanks!
David Booth
------------------------------------------------------------
[1]W3C
[1] https://www.w3.org/
– DRAFT –
FHIR RDF
16 September 2021
[2]IRC log.
[2] https://www.w3.org/2021/09/16-hcls-irc
Attendees
Present
David Booth, Emily Pfaff, Gaurav, Gopi, Rob Hausam
Regrets
-
Chair
David Booth
Scribe
dbooth
Contents
1. [3]Issue 77
2. [4]Summary of action items
Meeting minutes
Issue 77
[5]https://github.com/w3c/hcls-fhir-rdf/issues/77#
[5] https://github.com/w3c/hcls-fhir-rdf/issues/77
Discussing 4a vs 4b
Gopi: Suggestion changing birthDateObject to
birthDateExtension.
david: good idea
AGREED: Prefer 4b over 4a
David: 3b vs 4b?
gaurav: prefer 3b
emily: agree
gopi: agree
AGREED: Prefer 3b over 4b
david: Compare 5a vs 3U
emily: Don't like the extra ont relationships.
gopi: still prefer 3b over both of these
gaurav: calling them extensions might be simpler.
gaurav: prefer not to create all these new properties
gaurav: The fhir:Extension in 3bU seems like it could be
fhir:Boolean
david: Or it could be both a fhir:Extension and a fhir:Boolean.
David: 5a, 3U or 3bU vs 3b?
emily: Prefer 3b over all of these.
gopi: 3bU makes sense if you are adding a certainty.
david: We should probably get eric's input before eliminating
these, to hear his perspective.
gaurav: Slightly prefering 3bU over 3b.
gopi: One advantage of 3bU is when you're entering data you can
just use that new predicate directly.
david: Not sure of the impact of 3gU (and other RDF-style
options) on conversion from RDF back to JSON. Assuming that the
standard machinery would not know about the extension. Seems it
would at least require converting the extension URL from an RDF
node to a string.
rob: might be able to pull in a package to tell the machinery
about the extension.
Action: Gaurav to spin up on JSON-LD framing
david: more ideas to explore for these options?
gopi: What about data validation?
… Need to validate cases, using SPARQL queries.
david: Yes, important to consider impact on validation.
gopi: Been looking at RDF reification. Extensions are similar
in my mind, for the Certainty example.
david: For the fhir:active example, RDF reification would be
applicable, because "Certainty" is a statement about the
boolean statement. But I don't think reification would be
applicable in other extension examples, such as the birthDate
example, which is just a matter of adding more information
(time of birth).
ADJOURNED
Summary of action items
1. [6]Gaurav to spin up on JSON-LD framing
Received on Tuesday, 21 September 2021 13:01:37 UTC