-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
IDMP-744 - Investigate simplifying potential circularities in the packaging / container specification part of the ontology #642
Conversation
…nstituency and revising the definition of medicinal product container (of which package item is a subclass) accordingly, as well as a redundant restriction on package item; revised the Amlodipine example to reflect these changes Signed-off-by: Elisa Kendall <[email protected]>
…ge to eliminate constituency, for the 1x28 tablet case Signed-off-by: Elisa Kendall <[email protected]>
…roduct from being something that a medicinal product container can include (a pharmaceutical product must be part of a manufactured item or medicinal product to be included in a container) Signed-off-by: Elisa Kendall <[email protected]>
…the container constituency Signed-off-by: Elisa Kendall <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Elisa Kendall <[email protected]>
Adding package item -has constituent -> package constituent makes package item a constituency by inference. This is ok, because package item is a specification/definition of a physical item based largely on how it is composed. So from that side I approve and like this change. However I do not like the current definition (coming from the idmp spec) of package item, a subclass of material specification , which if can likely be misunderstood as a physical thing and if that were the case it would be inconsistent. An explanatory note is needed, if we want to keep the definition. |
…t is a specification rather than an actual physical package item Signed-off-by: Elisa Kendall <[email protected]>
Fixed |
Description: