Dear all, The European Institute for Health Records has created a registry of coding systems. In the (near) future they expect to be the place where coding systems and their meta-information are registered so an URL and unique identifying number will suffice.
Will this be the way to go? Gerard -- <private> -- Gerard Freriks, MD Huigsloterdijk 378 2158 LR Buitenkaag The Netherlands T: +31 252544896 M: +31 620347088 E: gfrer at luna.nl Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Benjamin Franklin 11 Nov 1755 On 1, Dec, 2008, at 5:26 , Koray Atalag wrote: > So custom/local terminologies can be handled this way and the > implementation will be left to developers....BUT this may result in > different implementations which may render interoperability in the > long run.... > > So I suggest a sub-section within ontology section where used > terminologies are declared explicitly; i.e. "umls": 2008AA version > of NLM UMLS knowledge sources. Perhaps an URI and other details can > be specified (i.e. WSDL). I think it is easier for the community to > agree on such a naming convention. > > Custom local terminologies can be declared this way and you can > create terminology names for use in term/constraint bindings.Perhaps > creating a keyword (i.e. CustomTerminology) might be a good idea so > that these names do not interfere with formal names. > > Cheers, -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20081201/b8d893a6/attachment.html>
