Page History
...
Proposed or Possible Requirement | Priority | Notes | Is Requirement? (Yes/No) |
---|---|---|---|
Remove Dependency on Value Set Definitions for NCIt defined Value Sets | |||
Generate All NCIt sourced Value Sets from NCIt source. | |||
Resolve discrepancies between number of value set definition files and value sets defined in NCIt | |||
Provide acceptable substitutions for value set URI's and other metadata that is not defined in the source (List in other rows as necessary) | |||
Maintain Resolved Value Set Coding Scheme API as interface | |||
Provide concurrent value set loading capability | |||
Provide programmatic Access to value set definition XML files | |||
Provide example code for regular api level access (CodedNodeGraph example) of value set members | |||
Provide support for Neoplasm like value sets (Hierarchical) |
Discussion Points | Notes |
---|---|
Who are the stakeholders and end users of value sets | |
Define what end user interface is (Shell script, Rest Service, Browser based GUI) | |
Define performance or other considerations that require a move to triple store or OWL API (For Example: Do value sets need full OWL expressivity) | |
Will non NCIt sourced value sets continue to use legacy value set definitions? (more a scope statement question) | |
What considerations/requirements drive the development of an architecture that encompasses hierarchical value sets and new resolution mechanisms? | |
Create OWL source for some/all values sets from LexEVS api or other source? (OWL export of value sets) | |
What user needs around the report writer generate requirements for LexEVS or the LexEVS team | |
Does Excel spread sheet generation fall into the scope of LexEVS value set resolution or otherwise generate requirements for the LexEVS team | |
Do the users/stakeholders in the value set API have any new requirements beyond those already stated |
...
Questions that need further research or consideration.
Open Questions |
---|