Facilitating Namespace Lookups
Description
Objectives
Use Case?
Options
Add additional synonym(s) to the namespace concept.
See sample file of Descriptions (RF1 format) from Michel L :
Pros
Simple, can be acheieved without changing tooling or adding new artefacts to a release.
Cons
Fields would need some pre-agreed format to be discoverable. Even then, possibility of accidental match.
New Refset
Pros
Explicit. Many fields could be added.
Cons
Status | CHANGE THIS STATUS |
|---|
Team
Child Pages
Relevant Documents
Comments
Jul 21, 2025
(edited)
@Peter Williams I saw this topic mentioned elsewhere (Use of the MOVED TO historical association - Modeling Advisory Group - SNOMED Confluence) while cleaning up my emails.
Just to add - we implemented synonyms in SCTAU many years ago for this concepts.
We haven't got all - just the "namespaces" that exist in core. (and it probably predates SCTID Info online lookup - we had to manually transcribe from a pdf, hence we only added PTs for the ones we encountered).
e.g. 370137002|HSCIC (UK) Namespace 1000000|
Since you've got the data in a machine readable format you could probably just generate similar PTs and be done with it.
Might need to have some exceptions for "personal names" so we don't immortalise individuals in the terminology...
I'm not sure how useful these concepts really are. As targets for "move to" they're conflating module with namespace. If a concept is "moved to X" that really means it's active a module owned by that namespace (the ID should be the same).
We just use this as an easy way to find out the origins of a concepts we encounter in core, without leaving the terminology browser. I don't think it needs to be much more complicated.