>I am not sure what you mean by this. My understanding is that
>compositional codes serve as a "read-only" language that is more resistant
>to undermining/redefinition by human usage.
The principle usages of these codes in the U.S. is a) billing and b)
look-up in medical literature search services (Medline, etc.), I would
say. Is this felt to be correct?
>If there are enough people willing to build a free version, then things
>will change.
The question is why? We already have codes for billing and look-up. Why
do we want more codes? I know that this has a decidedly "devil's advocate"
odor to it, but I am not being entirely unserious. Why am I wrong, is I
guess what I'm saying? I definitely think it's a useful discussion, and
even the use of the word "ontology" makes me believe that others think it's
a useful discussion too.
John
