HI GF :
Do you agree that this can also be true for an Ontology .
carl
quote who=Gerard Freriks
Hi,
An other property of the Archetype is that it is derived from a a model
that models the structure via which information is stored/represented/
retrieved in a system.
GF
-- private --
Hi,
I can buy this.
But have you ever seen the UML model behind ICD, ICPC, or even SNOMED?
I know I;ve seen the one behind the CEN/TC251 EN 13606 where a kernel
model (UML) representing a generic document will be populated by
Archetypes that are derived from a Archetype model (UML).
Gerard
Gerard :
Good point.
I would like to see the UML models .. does anyone have them to share ?
carl
quote who=Gerard Freriks
Hi,
I can buy this.
But have you ever seen the UML model behind ICD, ICPC, or even SNOMED?
I know I;ve seen the one behind the CEN/TC251 EN 13606 where a kernel
model
Philippe
Thank you for this...very informative and I am starting to see how we are
converging with your work.
I believe that the 'structured terminology' - fils guide down from the
archetype
nodes - is an important part - SNOMED are trying to address it generically (ie
without archetypes) -
Hi Sam,
The structured langage is not a direct mapping from natural langage. It
is a tree of concepts ordered from generic to specific.
Example (sorry if I don't use the proper medical terms in english) :
polyp
-- location
left colon
-- size
3 mm
-- aspect
pedonculated
This
Philippe, Sam et Al :
Seeking clarification ..
Is it true to say :
the real distinction between an Archetype and an Ontology is that -
the role of an Archetype (item) is to provide contextual constraints
the role of an Ontology (item) is to provide conceptual constraints
an Ontology (item)
Hi,
An other property of the Archetype is that it is derived from a a model
that models the structure via which information is stored/represented/
retrieved in a system.
GF
-- private --
Gerard Freriks, arts
Huigsloterdijk 378
2158 LR Buitenkaag
The Netherlands
+31 252 544896
+31 654
b.cohen wrote:
I was responding to the original message from Chris Feahr, to which Gerard had
already responded, which was indeed calling for a universal ontology.
But the issue here is what to do about enterprises that have to live with
ontological variety. If standards can't make the problem go
8 matches
Mail list logo