Marc, You are absolutely right that we need to organize the topics. I had created a set of topics for mapping at http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=FHIR_RDF_Mapping and the topic “Modeling language and Serialization syntax” now has its own page where I have copied the discussion and also linked to a document comparing some of the syntaxes at http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=File:Comparison_of_Semantic_Web_serialization_syntaxes.pdf
The paper does not come to a conclusion – RDF/XML is the most verbose and is supported by the most tools I believe. Some people like Turtle. The Protégé expression editor uses Manchester Syntax so I am used to it. Tony Mallia EDMOND SCIENTIFIC COMPANY (ESC) From: Marc Twagirumukiza [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 06, 2015 5:54 PM To: Anthony Mallia Cc: Lloyd McKenzie; Jim McCusker; David Booth; HL7 ITS; [email protected]; w3c semweb HCLS Subject: RE: Proposed RDF FHIR syntax feedback Hi David, Sorry to jump again into this discussion. Is it possible to put such discussion in a kind of issue tracker/wiki/or something else? With 3 columns: the topic, the discussion thread, and the conclusion (where possible)? The purpose would be to keep all arguments in classified way according the topic but utmost to pick one or 2 conclusions points from each thread. Just thinking loud. F.eg<http://F.eg>.This is a nice informative discussion which can help the future "faq" and keeping one conclusion from it can prevent having the same discussion again. This holds also for other threads. Kind Regards, Marc Twagirumukiza. Sent via IBM Notes Traveler iPad Device Anthony Mallia --- RE: Proposed RDF FHIR syntax feedback --- From: "Anthony Mallia" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> To: "Lloyd McKenzie" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "Jim McCusker" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: "Marc Twagirumukiza" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "David Booth" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "HL7 ITS" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>, "w3c semweb HCLS" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:20 Subject: RE: Proposed RDF FHIR syntax feedback ________________________________ Lloyd, RDF, RDFS and OWL can all be expressed in RDF/XML. I am using it all the time out of Protégé. Tony From: Lloyd McKenzie [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 06, 2015 2:17 PM To: Jim McCusker Cc: Anthony Mallia; Marc Twagirumukiza; David Booth; HL7 ITS; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; w3c semweb HCLS Subject: Re: Proposed RDF FHIR syntax feedback Where we'll have a particular challenge is where the RDF and OWL representations can both be expressed using the same sytnax. It may be that the solution there is to return both the instance and class information. Is there a distinct mime-type for JSON-LD from regular JSON? Lloyd McKenzie Consultant, Information Technology Services Gevity Consulting Inc. E: -Your data has been truncated.
