Hi Ian, I certainly need to take a look at the SMART work before commenting further, but I'd personally focus on going from XSD to RDF.
I know that it sends a chill down the spine to hear XSD as an anchoring modeling formalism, especially if you are an object oriented person, but it is the most accessible, most tool and framework rich formalism we have at hand. If you go to RDF without XSD as the intermediate output, I'll ask: from what computable form you are going to go to RDF? Code? That'd be a nightmare to share among systems. I can't easily get my head around the XSD <-> RDF pipeline at the moment, but I'd go into this kind of work with all the tools I have at hand, and I have a hell a lot more tools in XSD space. (actually I'm going to be using EMF, but that is a different conversation) Regards Seref On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Ian McNicoll < Ian.McNicoll at oceaninformatics.com> wrote: > There is quite a bit of interest in the UK in adapting the US-based > SMART platform www.smartplatforms.org for UK use. One aspect of SMART > involves the definition of a fairly simple API which serves RDF graphs > of archetype like objects e.g Blood pressure, allergy. The SMART guys > are aware of openEHR and have been quite support of it in the CIMI > work, and I understand that they do not see the clinical content > definitions underpinning the APIs as core business. > > It seems to me that there is an interesting possibility of using > openEHR archetypes (probably templated) to define the clinical content > which is to be expressed as RDF graphs. This will give a much more > adaptable and extensible approach + better model governance etc. > > It seems to me that the key requirement is to be able to create a > run-time artefact, in the same way that we create Template data schema > but to output RDF rather than XSD. Is this correct and if so, does > anyone have any experience with this? > > The other interesting aspect is that because the SMART API returns > mostly ENTRY-level components, these need to be wrapped in some > COMPOSITION level metadata. Does it make sense that we actually return > very lean EHR Extracts? > > Ian > > -- > Dr Ian McNicoll > office +44 (0)1536 414 994 > fax +44 (0)1536 516317 > mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 > skype ianmcnicoll > ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com > > Clinical Modelling Consultant, Ocean Informatics, UK > Director openEHR Foundation www.openehr.org/knowledge > Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL > SCIMP Working Group, NHS Scotland > BCS Primary Health Care www.phcsg.org > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20120703/a06dfec9/attachment.html>
