@akanter I would like advice on the best practices to creating a concept mapping for a new project, OHRI which is an HIV Reference Implementation
- Does a separate mapping source OHRI make sense so that the concepts can be mapped and accessed through this, instead of CIEL prefix
- Any challenges, Gotchas that need to be looked out for
- How easy is it to support within OCL?
- What else needs to be considered
@eudson @alaboso @burke @jdick @ball
@ssmusoke why not exhaust existing sources (CIEL, SNOMED, ICD10, ICHI, … etc) before mapping new concepts?
Worst case, why not enrich CIEL in collaboration with others and the support of @akanter?
@mksd This would be based of CIEL and concepts in CIEL, but using the OHRI mapping
I am thinking that if this happens then countries/distributions can use their own mapping tags to help manage both CIEL and custom concepts
For more clarification instead of referring to concepts as CIEL:1067, can I use OHRI:1067 etc
I am wondering is it worth the effort to distinguish them, would it be considered a best practice
@ssmusoke We have used mappings like this in the past (ie. mdrtb module, et al). It’s a a great thought – but especially necessary if OHRI custom convenience or business logic concepts are NOT in CIEL. It would also be awesome to use OCL collections for these concept. Not sure if OCL is ready for this and the deployment process, but it should be (or close).
@ball Thanks for this clarification, I do not expect any custom concepts which will not come into CIEL so this helps me understand that the OHRI source mapping is not necessary
I will follow up with the OCL team to see how far they have gotten