Re: [Troll] Terminology bindings ... again

Thomas, I will have to digest it. I’ll be back. GF Gerard Freriks +31 620347088 gf...@luna.nl Kattensingel 20 2801 CA Gouda the Netherlands > On 3 Apr 2018, at 11:08, Thomas Beale wrote: > > Some theory along these lines >

Re: [Troll] Terminology bindings ... again

 Some theory along these lines is needed... On 03/04/2018 08:35, A Verhees wrote: GF :"There are NO agreed standardised archetypes/patterns we all use to define the meta-data in order to document the

Re: [Troll] Terminology bindings ... again

It is a generic problem that impacts OpenEHR also. Present systems need a lot of implicit human knowledge in order to interpret the data safely and fully. SNOMED pre-corodination is one way to make this implicit knowledge explicit. It possibly is a solution. My point is that it is not the best

Re: [Troll] Terminology bindings ... again

Check the initial messages on the thread. Basically how to use SNOMED in openEHR, and in a specific area: data querying. AQL support for SNOMED codes and expressions was an initial part of the topic. We are trying to solve a basic problem: how to get data out the systems in a smart way. This is

Re: [Troll] Terminology bindings ... again

That is the problem. There is no focus. This discussion will not solve anything. Op di 3 apr. 2018 09:48 schreef GF : > It is Obvious: > > - We need to take the next step in Semantic Interoperability: Semantic > interpretability. > - And think about what is missing, so far > -

Re: [Troll] Terminology bindings ... again

It is Obvious: - We need to take the next step in Semantic Interoperability: Semantic interpretability. - And think about what is missing, so far - How to use codes from Terminologies and Classifications - How to deal with the full Context/Epistemology - How to deal with modifiers for

Re: [Troll] Terminology bindings ... again

Op di 3 apr. 2018 09:43 schreef GF : > Archetype modelling and the use of SNOMED pre- and/or post-coordination > You too have a nice day > > > Gerard Freriks > +31 620347088 > gf...@luna.nl > > Kattensingel 20 > 2801 CA Gouda > the Netherlands > > On 3 Apr 2018, at 09:31, A

Re: [Troll] Terminology bindings ... again

Archetype modelling and the use of SNOMED pre- and/or post-coordination Gerard Freriks +31 620347088 gf...@luna.nl Kattensingel 20 2801 CA Gouda the Netherlands > On 3 Apr 2018, at 09:31, A Verhees wrote: > > Can we specific define in about ten words which problem

Re: [Troll] Terminology bindings ... again

GF :"There are NO agreed standardised archetypes/patterns we all use to define the meta-data in order to document the full eppistemology > so data can be interpreted fully and safely. " > So what do you suggest as a solution? > > > > >> >> Gerard Freriks >> +31 620347088 >>

Re: [Troll] Terminology bindings ... again

I agree > The message is simple: don't allow items with complex meanings in leafnodes, > but use archetypes to represent complexity. Gerard Freriks +31 620347088 gf...@luna.nl Kattensingel 20 2801 CA Gouda the Netherlands > On 3 Apr 2018, at 00:04, A Verhees wrote:

Re: [Troll] Terminology bindings ... again

Can we specific define in about ten words which problem is talked about in this discussion? Maybe we can then use that definition as a guideline to keep the discussion focussed. Best regards Bert Verhees Op di 3 apr. 2018 01:19 schreef Pablo Pazos : > Please see

Re: [Troll] Terminology bindings ... again

see below Gerard Freriks +31 620347088 gf...@luna.nl Kattensingel 20 2801 CA Gouda the Netherlands > On 2 Apr 2018, at 23:35, A Verhees wrote: > > GF: "When we add to all this that only part of the epistemology can be > pre-coordinated it means that part of the