15:00:44 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #hcls
15:00:44 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/04/28-hcls-irc
15:00:46 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
15:00:46 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #hcls
15:00:48 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be HCLS
15:00:48 <Zakim> ok, trackbot, I see SW_HCLS()11:00AM already started
15:00:49 <trackbot> Meeting: Semantic Web Health Care and Life Sciences Interest Group Teleconference
15:00:49 <trackbot> Date: 28 April 2015
15:01:17 <Zakim> +DBooth
15:01:20 <dbooth> zakim, who is here?
15:01:22 <Zakim> On the phone I see Tony, DBooth
15:01:22 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, dbooth, Tony, TallTed, trackbot, cloudcell_, ericP
15:01:56 <Zakim> +pknapp
15:03:31 <pknapp> pknapp has joined #HCLS
15:03:46 <Lloyd> Lloyd has joined #HCLS
15:04:07 <dbooth> david: this is how to scribe :)
15:04:15 <Tony> DBooth: instructions for recording
15:04:19 <dbooth> Scribe: Tony
15:04:40 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:04:48 <Lloyd> zakim, ipcaller is lloyd
15:04:48 <Zakim> +lloyd; got it
15:05:37 <dbooth> Topic: Approve Minutes of previous meetings
15:05:46 <dbooth> Apr 21 mintues: http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=ITS_RDF_Concall_Minutes_20150421
15:06:09 <dbooth> s/mintues/minutes/
15:06:21 <dbooth> RESOLVED: Apr 21 minutes approved!
15:06:53 <dbooth> Topic: FHIR RDF and Validation/Translation Task Force
15:07:00 <dbooth> http://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-hcls-minutes.html
15:07:58 <Tony> David: 3 issues that are in agenda should be reviewed
15:09:05 <Marc_Twagirumukiza> Marc_Twagirumukiza has joined #HCLS
15:09:15 <dbooth> ISSUE: How to represent CodeableConcept, Coding and Code?  Should all three be constraints on a common RDF type?
15:09:15 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-10 - How to represent codeableconcept, coding and code?  should all three be constraints on a common rdf type?.  Please complete additional details at <http://www.w3.org/2014/HCLS/track/issues/10/edit>.
15:10:00 <Zakim> +??P48
15:10:22 <dbooth> zakim, ??P48 is Marc
15:10:22 <Zakim> +Marc; got it
15:10:59 <rhausam> rhausam has joined #HCLS
15:11:13 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:11:35 <dbooth> zakim, IPcaller is Rafael
15:11:35 <Zakim> +Rafael; got it
15:11:53 <Zakim> +rhausam
15:11:58 <dbooth> Topic: Upcoming HL7 Meeting - Paris May 10-15
15:12:19 <dbooth> Paul: Probably will miss the call next week.
15:12:39 <Tony> Paul: Will not be available next week
15:13:14 <dbooth> Topic: FHIR RDF Project Scope Statement (Claude Nanjo) - Status?
15:13:45 <dbooth> Paul: Will go to Foundations Steering Division for approval next.
15:14:08 <dbooth> ... If approved, will go to TSC for next week or the following week approval.
15:14:23 <dbooth> Topic: Side-by-side example of two FHIR RDF approaches (Tony Mallia)
15:14:35 <dbooth> http://wiki.hl7.org/images/1/19/FHIR_RDF_Sample_side_by_side_comparisons_v2.pdf
15:17:05 <Rafael> Rafael has joined #HCLS
15:17:09 <dbooth> ISSUE-7 - Should we treat observation.code as an instance of a class?
15:18:00 <dbooth> Tony: See 2.1 and 2.2
15:19:16 <dbooth> ... In 2.2 the type is declared for each of the blank nodes.  Each blank node is an instance of a class.
15:19:54 <dbooth> david: What if it were not represented as an instance of a class?
15:20:37 <dbooth> tony: Put the LOINC type on the observation itself: :resource a <http://loinc.org/5544...>
15:20:57 <dbooth> lloyd: if you throw all the semantics on the observation then it would not be clear what is being discussed.
15:21:18 <dbooth> tony: agree
15:21:18 <Marc_Twagirumukiza> q+
15:21:59 <dbooth> lloyd: Grahame had an alternative in mind: we define our own predicate instead of saying it is a subtype.  He's nervous about using a subtype because there are ont that do silly things.
15:22:51 <dbooth> ... E.g., SNOMED says something is copyright INSTDO, so if you say that something is an instance of that then you end up saying that your instance is copyright of IHSTDO.
15:23:04 <dbooth> ack Marc
15:23:41 <dbooth> Marc: For LOINC it's a class, but when we go to SNOMED and we go to low level concepts, do we consider it also a class?
15:24:07 <dbooth> lloyd: Yes, you'd be saying this instance I'm recording is an instance of diabetes or alzheimers.
15:24:30 <rafael> rafael has joined #HCLS
15:24:57 <dbooth> Marc: Then we would not have a hierarchy problem, but this concept belongs to other concepts in the hierarchy I'm afraid we may be overruling SNOMED somehow.
15:25:35 <dbooth> ... We're saying that this element belongs to both SNOMED classes.
15:26:51 <dbooth> ... We have classes with parents that do not contain the concept below.  SNOMED clinical finding ... an element of observation is not necessarily a clinical finding.  If we use the low level we end up with a problem with hierarchy.
15:26:58 <Lloyd> q+
15:27:04 <dbooth> ... I'd be more comfortable using a higher level concept.
15:27:31 <dbooth> tony: I don't think that would give enough precision.
15:28:23 <dbooth> lloyd: If you have a SNOMED code in your instance -- diabetes -- then you're referencing every parent in they hierarchy.  It is a clinical finding, a condition of the lung, copyright IHSTDO.  That's how inheritance works.
15:28:29 <rhausam> q+
15:28:47 <dbooth> ... The fact that IHSTDO puts copyright on there is unfortunate, but it's what they'ave done.
15:29:11 <Tony> Q+
15:29:54 <dbooth> ... In theory it matters; in practice nobody will care that the copyright is there.
15:30:05 <dbooth> ... But if they do it, what can we expect of others?
15:30:10 <Zakim> +ericP
15:30:23 <Marc_Twagirumukiza> q+
15:31:40 <dbooth> marc: Another point: When you look at fhir coding.code, you can use something like skos for display (prefLabel)?
15:32:18 <dbooth> ack lloyd
15:32:25 <Lloyd> q+
15:33:15 <dbooth> rob: Lloyd's statement of the copyright issue may be overstated -- need more research.  Copyright applies to codes, identifiers, descriptions.  But in the ont the way it is represented I think it's an annotation which does not inherit.
15:33:56 <dbooth> tony: Yes, it's an annotation, so it does not inherit.
15:33:57 <Marc_Twagirumukiza> if we use the skos:notation /skos:prefLabel we can skip the information here in the graph and axpect it from a terminology server
15:34:17 <Marc_Twagirumukiza> at customer side
15:34:18 <dbooth> q?
15:34:30 <dbooth> ack rhausam
15:34:33 <dbooth> ack tony
15:34:38 <Marc_Twagirumukiza> q-
15:34:47 <rafael> q+:  Do we have a general approach to copyright embedded in terminologies?
15:35:43 <dbooth> lloyd: Glad that SNOMED copyright is correct.  But the premise that ont designers can do stupid things, but not a convincing reason not to use the proper mechanism for using RDF on the grounds that someone might do something stupid.
15:36:08 <dbooth> ... If they do, then that ont may need to be excluded from reasoning until it is fixed.
15:36:21 <dbooth> ... But the is-a relationship is semantically correct and what we should use
15:36:35 <rhausam> q+
15:36:51 <dbooth> q+ To agree with lloyd.  Bad data will also appear sometimes similarly.
15:36:59 <dbooth> ack rhausam
15:37:16 <Lloyd> ack lloyd
15:37:52 <dbooth> rob: At what level to indicate semantics?   Okay for coding to be an instance of SNOMED CT class, but at the CodeableConcept level that's not the best thing to do, particularly if there are multiple concepts.
15:38:29 <dbooth> tony: Instance is pointing at the level of CodeableConcept.
15:38:52 <Lloyd> q+
15:39:08 <dbooth> rob: To get the power of reasoning that's probably what is needed, but need to be cautious about making that strong a link.
15:39:28 <dbooth> ack dbooth
15:39:28 <Zakim> dbooth, you wanted to agree with lloyd.  Bad data will also appear sometimes similarly.
15:40:05 <dbooth> ack lloyd
15:41:40 <dbooth> lloyd: To expand, if you have a snomed code for bacterial pneumonia, and an ICD10 concept saying pneumonia, and a mapping saying this ICD10 code is equiv to the snomed concept of viral pneumonia, then you'll have a conflict in your reasoning.
15:42:21 <dbooth> ... The conflict will show up because somewhere the data is wrong, and it will be aggravating, but the tools are doing what they are supposed to do.
15:42:39 <Tony> Q+
15:42:39 <dbooth> ... And if you want to use RDF tools, then you need to be sure the data is clean enough to use it.
15:42:51 <dbooth> +1 to what lloyd is saying :)
15:42:57 <rhausam> I agree with Lloyd on that
15:42:59 <dbooth> ack tony
15:43:21 <dbooth> tony: Lloyd has made an argument for using RDF to validate data.  :)
15:43:29 <dbooth> +1 to tony :)
15:43:37 <dbooth> q?
15:43:58 <Zakim> -Marc
15:44:05 <rafael> q+
15:44:07 <Lloyd> q+
15:44:13 <dbooth> paul: No different than any other data analysis situation.  You need to filter out the bad data.
15:44:22 <dbooth> ack rafael
15:45:23 <dbooth> rafael: As another use case, could use RDF as analytics platform.  This will be our methodology for analyzing, using RDF as a metadata standard.  Valuable use case for validation/auditing before exchanging it.
15:45:30 <dbooth> ack lloyd
15:46:31 <dbooth> lloyd: To clarify, it is not quite the same as other circumstances, because with RDF, if you have the bad data and you try to reason around how many patients exist within a particular age range and geographic area, the reasoner would still blow up, even if that inconsistency is unrelated.
15:46:53 <Tony> Q+
15:47:00 <dbooth> q+ to say that you can partition your data using named graphs to help get around inconsistency problems.
15:47:45 <dbooth> q?
15:48:18 <dbooth> tony: But you can condition the way the reasoner works based on the ontologies that you import.
15:48:32 <dbooth> ack dbooth
15:48:32 <Zakim> dbooth, you wanted to say that you can partition your data using named graphs to help get around inconsistency problems.
15:51:04 <dbooth> david: Are we agreed that we should represent Observation.code as an instance of one or more classes?
15:51:24 <dbooth> tony: yes.
15:51:26 <Lloyd> +1
15:51:29 <rafael> +1
15:51:48 <dbooth> paul: +1
15:52:13 <dbooth> RESOLVED: agreed that we should represent Observation.code as an instance of one or more classes
15:52:40 <dbooth> Topic: ISSUE-8 - If we treat observation.code as an instance of a class, should that class represent the disease itself or a *description* of the disease?
15:52:57 <dbooth> erstin suggests: https://code.google.com/p/ogms/
15:52:57 <Tony> Q+
15:53:52 <dbooth> tony: there is real world occurrence of the disease, and the information record about it.  Two sorts of instances.
15:54:20 <rhausam> q+
15:54:37 <dbooth> ... I think the class or type in RDF is a description -- not the occurrence of the disease.
15:54:44 <dbooth> ack tony
15:54:52 <dbooth> ack rhausam
15:54:55 <dbooth> q+ ericp
15:55:29 <dbooth> rob: Not sure what tony means by description.  Information artifact?  That's the traditional HL7 way of looking at it.  But each ont may have a different way of looking at it.
15:55:46 <dbooth> ... We may not be able to declare that it is only oen thing.
15:55:54 <dbooth> ack ericp
15:56:32 <dbooth> eric:  Agree w tony.  You would not have a temporal characteristic for appendicitis, but for someone's incidence of appendicitis.
15:57:10 <dbooth> david: Isn't that the difference between instance and class rather than between disease and its description?
15:57:36 <dbooth> eric: You could say there is a class of all incidences of appendicitis, but that's not what snomed is describing.
15:57:38 <rhausam> q+
15:57:56 <dbooth> q+ to say that I would be surprised if snomed did that.  can we confirm?
15:58:06 <dbooth> ack rhausam
15:58:40 <dbooth> rob: Disagree w tony.  Snomed is all classes.  Pneumonia concept could represent all instances of pneumonia disease.
15:58:48 <ericP> q+ to ask for proposals for tomorrow's V&T agenda
15:59:01 <dbooth> ... But definitely snomed is not going to the instance level.
15:59:20 <dbooth> ... if we put it into a fhir resource, it is a specific instance of disease.
15:59:23 <dbooth> ack dbooth
15:59:23 <Zakim> dbooth, you wanted to say that I would be surprised if snomed did that.  can we confirm?
16:00:15 <dbooth> ack ericp
16:00:15 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to ask for proposals for tomorrow's V&T agenda
16:00:48 <dbooth> tony: Discuss blank node issue?
16:00:54 <dbooth> +1
16:01:41 <Zakim> -pknapp
16:02:24 <dbooth> tony: suggest we do update proposals for issues list?
16:02:58 <Zakim> -Tony
16:03:00 <Zakim> -lloyd
16:03:01 <Zakim> -DBooth
16:03:02 <Zakim> -Rafael
16:03:03 <Zakim> -ericP
16:03:05 <dbooth> ADJOURNED
16:03:38 <dbooth> i/Scribe:/Scribe: dbooth
16:03:57 <Zakim> -rhausam
16:03:58 <Zakim> SW_HCLS()11:00AM has ended
16:03:58 <Zakim> Attendees were Tony, DBooth, pknapp, lloyd, Marc, Rafael, rhausam, ericP
16:04:13 <dbooth> Present: Tony, DBooth, pknapp, lloyd, Marc, Rafael, rhausam, ericP
16:04:21 <dbooth> Chair: David Booth and Paul Knapp
16:04:42 <dbooth> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:04:42 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/04/28-hcls-minutes.html dbooth
16:07:01 <dbooth> s/ISSUE-7/Topic: ISSUE-7/
16:07:34 <dbooth> i/Approve/Scribe: dbooth
16:07:48 <dbooth> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:07:48 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/04/28-hcls-minutes.html dbooth
16:39:55 <dbooth> s/erstin/Kerstin/
16:40:03 <dbooth> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:40:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/04/28-hcls-minutes.html dbooth
16:44:52 <dbooth> dbooth has joined #hcls
16:45:08 <dbooth> s/Scribe: Tony//
16:45:16 <dbooth> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:45:16 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/04/28-hcls-minutes.html dbooth
18:29:12 <Zakim> Zakim has left #hcls