Date: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 at 1:47 PM
To: Andrew Hangsleben <hangs...@umn.edu<mailto:hangs...@umn.edu>>
Cc: "GPC-DEV@LISTSERV.KUMC.EDU<mailto:GPC-DEV@LISTSERV.KUMC.EDU>"
<GPC-DEV@listserv.kumc.edu<mailto:GPC-DEV@listserv.kumc.edu>>
Subject: RE: SNOW Shri
, 2017 1:18 PM
To: Dan Connolly
Cc: GPC-DEV@LISTSERV.KUMC.EDU
Subject: Re: SNOW Shrine Ontology
Thanks Dan, we should be up and running at UMN now; I ran a few queries to
verify we were returning results. Out of curiosity, is there any reason we
aren't using the PCORnet ontology directly
...@listserv.kumc.edu] on behalf of Andrew
> Hangsleben [hangs...@umn.edu]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 03, 2017 10:43 AM
> *To:* GPC-DEV@LISTSERV.KUMC.EDU
> *Subject:* SNOW Shrine Ontology
>
> Hi Everyone,
> We are working on getting our ontology and mappings configured here at
> UMN.
:43 AM
To: GPC-DEV@LISTSERV.KUMC.EDU
Subject: SNOW Shrine Ontology
Hi Everyone,
We are working on getting our ontology and mappings configured here at UMN. I
was hoping someone could help me understand which ontologies we are using for
the SNOW network. My current understanding is that sites are
Hi Everyone,
We are working on getting our ontology and mappings configured here at UMN.
I was hoping someone could help me understand which ontologies we are using
for the SNOW network. My current understanding is that sites are using the
PCORnet/SCIHLS locally, but we are using the shrine
