See also: IRC log
harold: Pretty close to
converged. There was more discussion between Grahame and Lloyd
about where the FHIR URIs belong.
... There was fhir:CodedConcept that can have one or more
Codes, and within each Coding it is okay to have a concept. But
should additional code concepts be allowed?
... There was a hope that the aggregate of the multiple codings
could be reasoned about in the outer coded concept.
<hsolbrig> fhir:Observation.code [ fhir:CodeableConcept.coding [ fhir:index 0; fhir:concept loinc:29463-7; fhir:Coding.system [ fhir:value "http://loinc.org" ]; fhir:Coding.code [ fhir:value "29463-7" ]; fhir:Coding.display [ fhir:value "Body Weight" ] ], [ fhir:index 1; fhir:concept loinc:3141-9; fhir:Coding.system [ fhir:value "http://loinc.org" ]; fhir:Coding.code [ fhir:value "3141-9" ]; [CUT]
<hsolbrig> http://hl7-fhir.github.io/observation-example.ttl.html
harold: Sometimes we can create a
URI for the concept, such as fhir:concept loinc:29463-7;
... But sometimes we cannot, as with fhir:index 3
... The troubling point is that in some circumstances Lloyd
thought it could be used as a compositional grammar, such as
ARM and RIGHT.
dbooth: My previous understanding of multiple codings under an fhir:Observation.code was that it is a logical conjunction, i.e., AND, of the codings.
<hsolbrig> harold: a third interpretation would be that ANY of the codes completely represents the intent.
<ericP> ericP: it may be more accurate to describe it as a Union.
<hsolbrig> In that a receiver can proceed if it understands SNOMED or if it understands LOINC or if it understands something else
eric: Maybe it means more like a union.
sharam: I understand it, and we use it at infor, that all of these codes independently represent the concept.
dbooth: That sounds like logical AND -- all are independently true.
<ericP> i think it's a Union, not an Intersection
eric: AND is more like an
intersection. If there is a coding that I don't understand,
then the the other codings are still true.
... If it's a union, and all apply, even though it is treated
as a union then you can still get use out of it if you treat it
as an intersection.
... If you start modeling them as intersection then the
modelers need to be concerned about whether then are the same
kinds of things.
<ericP> ... e.g. x:FracturedTibia and y:SpiralFracture
harold: This affects both senders
and receives. We need to nail this down. Also, the coding
element itself includes capability of compositional
grammar.
... If you are going to allow fractureOfArm above, then how
does it relate to below?
... My understanding is that if the receiver did not understand
one coding then it may understand another.
guoqian: Does multiple coding violate the cardinality constraint in the model?
harold: No. CodedConcept cardinality is 1, but it can contain any number of codings inside.
sharam: From data modeling perspective in Infor, if you look at these concepts they have system property. When you have concepts from different systems, it is semantically difficult to combine them from multiple systems, such as ARM from LOINC and LEFT from SNOMED.
harold: I thought we removed the fhir:Concept from the Observation.code level.
<hsolbrig> http://hl7-fhir.github.io/observation.shex.html
dbooth: Need to go back to FHIR group to nail down the semantics of multiple codings?
guoqian: Not all codings have fhir:concept in the example.
harold: Right. You create it if you can.
<hsolbrig> <CodeableConcept> {fhir:concept IRI*;
harold: I'm thinking of
disallowing fhir:concept at the CodeableConcept level -- only
have it at the Coding level.
... I also mentioned the type arc for references and said it is
optional. Grahame said we had decided.
dbooth: We decided that *if* it is included then it must be a specific reference type, such as ObservationReference. But we postponed the decision about whether it should be required/optional/disallowed.
https://github.com/w3c/hcls-fhir-rdf/issues/26
https://www.w3.org/2016/04/19-hcls-minutes.html
eric: david didn't want extra type arcs; I wanted a type arc to enable the patient to be validated without dereferencing the URI.
https://github.com/w3c/hcls-fhir-rdf/issues/25
<scribe> ACTION: Harold to start discussion in zulip about the exact semantics of multiple codings [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/05/24-hcls-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-56 - Start discussion in zulip about the exact semantics of multiple codings [on Harold Solbrig - due 2016-05-31].
harold: Eric has made a shex-based validator service for FHIR RDF
<ericP> Git repo for ShEx server
eric: It's a small server. Uses a
KOA. I'm adding better error messages to it.
... Right now if it doesn't match then you get null.
harold: Michael Van Der Zel is using it.
eric: If you give it a focus node
identifier it interprets as a relative URL relative to the
document. Relatively friendly
... Planning to make it a web-based service.
harold: Can it be on the yosemite site?
dbooth: I think so. i'll look into it.
<hsolbrig> http://fhir.fhir-schema-org.appspot.com/
http://fhir.fhir-schema-org.appspot.com/
harold: It's relatively easy to build if you go to github instructions.
<hsolbrig> http://fhir.fhir-schema-org.appspot.com/docs/full.html
harold: If you go to that page --> schemas -> Full list --> Extension 'fhir'
http://fhir.fhir-schema-org.appspot.com/docs/full.html
<hsolbrig> http://fhir.fhir-schema-org.appspot.com/Observation
harold: scroll down and look
under w5: http://w5.fhir-schema-org.appspot.com/w5
... scroll down to Observation below w5
... One point raised by Marc T (responsible for W3C life sci
part of schema.org)
<hsolbrig> http://schema.org/docs/meddocs.html
harold: when dealing with
schema.org you have 3 choices: 1. add to schema.org itself 2.
create an extension (what was done) 3. conforms to schema.org
but not under schema.org
... Marc also mentioned that schema.org people believe in local
predicates. We have Observation.bodySite. They would want to
have predicates of bodySite without the prefix, which goes back
to discussions that we have had, that the meaning of the
predicates changes based on the context.
... Part of the discussion: value of doing this at all; how to
align this with medical stuff that is in there.
<hsolbrig> http://health-lifesci.schema.org/MedicalCondition
harold: If you dig down to the
medical stuff they have already gone to great lenghts to align
with established medical terminologies such as SNOMED.
... You cannot see the connections to LOINC and SNOMED, but
they exist.
<hsolbrig> https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg
<hsolbrig> https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/tree/sdo-deimos/data/ext/health-lifesci
harold: the above URL is the
github that goes into schema.org
... and the second link is the health-lifesci part that goes
into schema.org
<hsolbrig> https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/blob/sdo-deimos/data/ext/health-lifesci/med-health-core.rdfa
harold: Line 66 shows a mapping to snomed-ct
<hsolbrig> http://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases_conditions/hic_anemia
harold: If you view source of
that Cleveland Clinic URL, you'll see it uses that medical
stuff from schema.org
... Marc T wants to align with FHIR.
dbooth: We should absolutely align.
eric: Cleveland Clinic use case
is talking about medical knowledge domain, rather than the
medical records domain.
... My guess is that there will be more use cases for medical
knowledge than records in schema.org.
harold: we learned that at the
moment google's external search engine pays attention to this,
but their internal appliance does not.
... It would help dramatically if it did.
... There is deidentified data at Mayo that could be exposed
using FHIR.
<scribe> ACTION: DBooth to look into hosting ShEx-based FHIR RDF validator on yosemiteproject.org [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/05/24-hcls-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-57 - Look into hosting shex-based fhir rdf validator on yosemiteproject.org [on David Booth - due 2016-05-31].
harold: Need to show that the FHIR RDF is round trippable.
dbooth: Should be checked in the build, for all examples.
ADJOURNED
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.144 of Date: 2015/11/17 08:39:34 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/Mayo/Cleveland Clinic/ No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: dbooth Inferring Scribes: dbooth Present: Amol_Bhalla_(Infor) David_Booth Sharam_Shahpouri Harold_Solbrig EricP James_Anderson Brian_Pech Quoqian_Jiang Rob_Hausam Thomas_Lukasik Found Date: 24 May 2016 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2016/05/24-hcls-minutes.html People with action items: dbooth harold[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]