mbrochhausen
commented
4 years ago I am not sure this class should be created in PNO. Was that what we agreed upon in the Aim 4 meeting?
On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 1:10 PM Clint Dowland notifications@github.com wrote:
I am submitting a term request for code set, as a child of document, with the following annotations:
Definition: A document that is a collection of identifiers that has been created to identify and annotate core ideas of a specified domain, and where the intention of its creators is that the identifiers have a one-to-one correspondence with entities in reality outside the aggregate.
Comment: Does not imply absence vs. presence of any taxonomy
Comment: Does not imply that identifiers denote particulars, universals, or defined classes (a.k.a. attributive collections) or even that they denote only one of these three types of entities (e.g., SNOMED and even various OBO ontologies have identifiers that identify entities in all three categories).
Comment: The identifiers do not denote each other.
Comment: Each identifier is often (but not necessarily) associated with a text string—variously called a “description,” “name,” “title,” or “label”—that helps humans reach the target of denotation.
When there is no such string, it is almost always because the identifiers take the form of human language words. For example, a “sex” or “gender” code set could have identifiers “MALE” and “FEMALE,” or even “M” and “F” (by convention, we understand what these mean).
Comment: For National Drug Codes (NDCs) and similar code sets, there doesn’t even have to be a single, fully-concretized copy somewhere (for example, for NDCs there is no centralized database or repository where they all live as one instance of concretization of code set). The code set can be “distributively” concretized. This seems like an unusual exception, but it also likely applies to Universal Product Codes (UPCs) and their follow on Global Trade Item Numbers (GTINs).
Comment: Many code sets are created for a specific purpose in addition to merely identifying and annotating core ideas of a specified domain.
Comment: For each given domain, there can potentially exist multiple code sets. The multiplicity of code sets is partially due to the different specific purposes of those code sets.
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ProperNameOntology/proper-name-ontology/issues/5, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACF6DLUIYB4I7D5YSOGYCG3RMXTBNANCNFSM4MIYAVFQ .
CDowland
sjbost
hoganwr
I am submitting a term request for code set, as a child of document, with the following annotations:
Definition: A document that is a collection of identifiers that has been created to identify and annotate core ideas of a specified domain, and where the intention of its creators is that the identifiers have a one-to-one correspondence with entities in reality outside the aggregate.
Comment: Does not imply absence vs. presence of any taxonomy
Comment: Does not imply that identifiers denote particulars, universals, or defined classes (a.k.a. attributive collections) or even that they denote only one of these three types of entities (e.g., SNOMED and even various OBO ontologies have identifiers that identify entities in all three categories).
Comment: The identifiers do not denote each other.
Comment: Each identifier is often (but not necessarily) associated with a text string—variously called a “description,” “name,” “title,” or “label”—that helps humans reach the target of denotation.
When there is no such string, it is almost always because the identifiers take the form of human language words. For example, a “sex” or “gender” code set could have identifiers “MALE” and “FEMALE,” or even “M” and “F” (by convention, we understand what these mean).
Comment: For National Drug Codes (NDCs) and similar code sets, there doesn’t even have to be a single, fully-concretized copy somewhere (for example, for NDCs there is no centralized database or repository where they all live as one instance of concretization of code set). The code set can be “distributively” concretized. This seems like an unusual exception, but it also likely applies to Universal Product Codes (UPCs) and their follow on Global Trade Item Numbers (GTINs).
Comment: Many code sets are created for a specific purpose in addition to merely identifying and annotating core ideas of a specified domain.
Comment: For each given domain, there can potentially exist multiple code sets. The multiplicity of code sets is partially due to the different specific purposes of those code sets.