> It seems like a reasonable use case!
I'm actually working on a project that's doing basically this (indexing and
aggregating data abstracted from single-visit and multi-site epi studies), and
I agree that this is a great use case. Right now, we're using a relational data
model, but I am firml
I'd suggest looking at the US National Library of Medicine's Unified Medical
Language System (UMLS):
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/umls/
It is, among other things, a metathesaurus of biomedical language built from a
couple dozen source vocabularies. I'm pretty sure that there's at least one
From another lurker, ditto. Following along with the discussions has
been helpful in many ways.
-SB
On Jun 25, 2008, at 8:34 AM, Rakesh Biswas wrote:
As a lurker I too agree.
rakesh
> Nevertheless, since your proposal in this message was to build URIs
> (URLs) that cannot resolve, I would favour using LSIDs as identifiers
> since it is less ad hoc...
I'd like to second this notion, as well as the one expressed earlier by
Matthias Samwald--- there already is a ton of work b
