Strictly speaking, this is not an “official” mapping, and it is subject to
change without warning. However, it is not unreasonable to use it as
indicative of the DL representation of SNOMED CT and it was the model used when
the IHTSDO moved their tooling from a bespoke algorithm to Snorocket,
Yes there is a formal mapping. If you download SNOMED from the NLM there
will be a PERL script written by Kent Spackman somewhere in there. It will
use the official release files and generate an OWL file. That is the
official mapping. The Plus in EL+ I used to know. I think it means
hierarchic
Is there a formal mapping (and maybe impelementation?) between SNOMED and
OWL EL+? What's been added to the +?
Thanks,
Jim
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 5:34 PM, wrote:
> On the last point. There is a post coordination syntax for SNOMED (which
> if you understand OWL is really very similar with diff
On the last point. There is a post coordination syntax for SNOMED (which
if you understand OWL is really very similar with different syntax). I'd
think for the last use case you might as well use the SNOMED post
coordination syntax. It's actually easier than most representations of
OWL, and an
Peter,
Good to see you at the HL7 meeting.
There seem to be three approaches being worked in RDF
1. The first is expressing the FHIR payload in RDF. The ontology is
therefore the FHIR ontology. The discussion at HL7 was about making another
representation of the payload in RDF.
2.
