Hi Matheus, I'd be interested to hear about your problems. I'd also be curious to learn how you handled generics/parameterized types. Unless one defines a meta layer in owl with semantics for generics, I guess the only option is to materialize every possible type parameter T to its own type.
All the best Seref On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 7:26 PM, Matheus Wichman <matheus.wich...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Seref, > > The ontologies available on the link you posted were developed using an > old specification of RM. > > I converted the current RM to OWL, like Isabel did. However I had some > problems to represent list structures. > > 2016-07-12 13:02 GMT-03:00 Seref Arikan <serefari...@kurumsalteknoloji.com > >: > >> Greetings, >> >> I was wondering if there is any projects out there that provide an OWL >> version of the RM. >> >> I found this page: http://trajano.us.es/~isabel/EHR/ where an OWL >> version is kindly provided, though I'll need to get in touch with the >> author to clarify the terms and conditions of use. >> >> There are papers out there that use an OWL representation of archetypes >> etc but I could not find any RM representation other than the link above. >> Any pointers would be appreciated. >> >> Cheers >> Seref >> >> _______________________________________________ >> openEHR-technical mailing list >> openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org >> >> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org >> > > > > -- > Atenciosamente, > > Matheus Wichman > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org >
_______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
