Date & Time
20:00 to 21:00 UTC Wednesday 26th August 2020
Location
Zoom meeting link (password: 764978)
Goals
- To walk through complete draft of ECL v1.5
- To discuss next steps
Attendees
- Chair: Linda Bird
- Project Group: Michael Lawley, Anne Randorff Højen, Peter Jordan, Daniel Karlsson, Ed Cheetham, Rob Hausam
Apologies
Agenda and Meeting Notes
Description | Owner | Notes |
---|---|---|
Welcome and agenda | NOTE: Next meeting to be held on Wednesday 9th September | |
Concrete Values | Linda Bird | Specifications
|
Expression Constraint Language | Linda Bird |
Alternative 3 - Use non-defining relationships on the language refset concept
|
URIs for Extended Editions | How to refer to an 'extended edition' using a URI - e.g. "International Edition plus the following 2 nursing modules: 733983009 |IHTSDO Nursing Health Issues module|and 733984003 |IHTSDO Nursing Activities module| Use Case - Need to execute an ECL, that refers to "^ 733991000 | Nursing Health Issues Reference Set (foundation metadata concept) |" and/or "^ 733990004 | Nursing Activities Reference Set (foundation metadata concept) |", where the substrate includes the international edition, plus the modules that include these reference sets July 2020 International Edition URI: http://snomed.info/sct/900000000000207008/version/20200731 July 2020 International Edition + nursing modules URI ?? - For example:
| |
Querying Refset Attributes | Linda Bird | Proposed syntax to support querying and return of alternative refset attributes (To be included in the SNOMED Query Language)
|
Returning Attributes | Michael Lawley | Proposal (by Michael) for discussion
For example, I can write: << 404684003|Clinical finding| : 363698007|Finding site| = <<66019005|Limb structure| << 404684003|Clinical finding| . 363698007|Finding site| But I can't get all the attribute names that are used by << 404684003|Clinical finding|
|
Reverse Member Of | Michael Lawley | Proposal for discussion What refsets is a given concept (e.g. 421235005 |Structure of femur|) a member of?
|
Expression Templates |
Examples: [[+id]]: [[1..*] @my_group sameValue(morphology)] { |Finding site| = [[ +id (<<123037004 |Body structure (body structure)| MINUS << $site[! SELF ] ) @site ]] , |Associated morphology| = [[ +id @my_morphology ]] }
Note that QI Project is coming from a radically different use case. Instead of filling template slots, we're looking at existing content and asking "exactly how does this concept fail to comply to this template?" For discussion: [[0..1]] { [[0..1]] 246075003 |Causative agent| = [[+id (< 410607006 |Organism| ) @Organism]] }Is it correct to say either one of the cardinality blocks is redundant? What are the implications of 1..1 on either side? This is less obvious for the self grouped case. Road Forward for SI
Additional note: QI project is no longer working in subhierarchies. Every 'set' of concepts is selected via ECL. In fact most reports should now move to this way of working since a subhierarchy is the trivial case. For a given template, we additionally specify the "domain" to which it should be applied via ECL. This is much more specific than using the focus concept which is usually the PPP eg Disease. FYI Michael Chu | |
Description Templates | Kai Kewley |
|
Query Language - Summary from previous meetings | FUTURE WORK Examples: version and dialect
Notes
|