2007/1/3, Andrew Patterson <andrewpatto at gmail.com>:
>
> > The system at present is performing mappings on pre-modeled archetypes
> > depriving it the luxury of having access to the author.
>
> This is what I meant by the 'split' case - a split between the
> people/group
> constructing the archetype, and the people doing the binding (in this
> Sam writing the archetype and you guys doing the terminology stuff). It
> doesn't lessen your points about the difficulties of doing the terminology
> mapping - I just wanted to clarify that the plan in the 'best case' is
> that there wouldn't be so much of a split (i.e. you'd be in communication
> with the people writing the archetype, or it would all be done within one
> tool by the same author)
>
> > I agree that this URL feature sounds a bit complex. Not having complete
> > knowledge of the Ocean methodology and objective makes it rather
> difficult
> > to comment though. However, 'is_a' trees are only part of the solution
> to
> > the binding/mapping process. There are a few archetypes that have 'is_a'
> > terms and can be dealt with in a less complex way i.e. without the use
> of
> > URL's.
>
> Other than actually enumerating the term codes in the ADL file, what other
> mechanism is there other than URLs?
>
> > Though am not sure whether the Ocean team had something else in mind
> > when using URLs.
>
> The URL system is not inherently bad - it solves the problem in a
> relatively clean way that allows lots of room for future developments
> in terminologies without constraining the solutions. I just worry that
> with complex terminologies like snomed being used more often
> it may be useful to have an inbetween solution i.e.
>
> simplest)
> list of codes typed in '123123', '3242342', '123123'
> * moderate *)
> simple langauge like "limit depth 5 (is_a('102323','arm fracture'))"
> complex)
> http://www.termserver.com/saved_query?realm=uk&concept_root=1231231
Hi,
Within our team in Link?ping we've discussed the potential of using OWL as a
query-language for constraint bindings. It might be something worth looking
into.
Regards,
Mattias
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20070104/4bb7dd4f/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical at openehr.org
http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
