- 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