Hi @MPhilofsky and thank you for your input!
Let me promote the related forum post and encourage people to review and speak out!
The only concern left and expressed by @Christian_Reich was that avoiding definitions would actually mean zero deduplication work, zero mappings, and synonyms even for the lexical matches, because the same term could mean different things based on different contexts. While it seems there’s quite some synonyms, mappings, and deduplication steps. I’d let Christian continue the discussion in the mentioned forum post, and maybe in the format of the Vocabularyathon 
.
Right. We discard them from the clean Domains (yeah, relatively clean Domains 
). The next step could be a classification and clean-up so that we can actually use them in studies. Here’s the problem statement and a work outline.
The decomposition and clean-up work described here. Somebody said these concepts carry meaningful information 
. Should we disguise it from users in a poorly modeled, over-coordinated local concepts? Or should we make these concepts available for the global community, properly coordinated and classified by the Domains?
Great! That would be a good start - we can’t cover the entire space.
@Vojtech_Huser Would you be interested in taking it on if we call the entire event Measureathon 
? BTW, I love your proposal.
@QI_omop, @schillil Would you like to be invited?
This is closely connected to #7 since this is the replacement for the old STCM. The proposal is here, and it requires elaboration.
@clairblacketer perfectly outlined the recommendations here. But wouldn’t the “Outdated” category and an explicit ban (recommendation) on using this table in new implementations work best?
Hmm, we’re not a Working Group. Not a Tutorial either. If we manage to attract enough attention and participation, should we consider having a separate day for it ?
Hi @Dymshyts @katy-sadowski, and welcome!
Would you like to invite @m-khitrun, @Eduard_Korchmar, @Patrick_Ryan, and the Vocabulary Committee to assess your new ideas and our previous options from the perspective of implementability and supportability?
Thanks, @Patrick_Ryan, for your support!
It reminds me of another topic of the Vocabulary management/exchange system/approach independently developed by the (i) Vocabulary team; (ii) @Andrew, @Jared, and @Polina_Talapova; (iii) @Javier, @gutte, and other FinOMOP people. @Andy_Kanter, @jamlung, Jon Payne, and OCL friends have their plans on the adoption of the OCL tooling for the CIEL vocabulary refresh and the general source delivery system.
Hi @aaronabend! That would be great! I’ll reach out to meet with the vocabulary leadership.
@llach Wonderful! In what context do you struggle with the problem?
@Vojtech_Huser Indeed, we require plural names. Then we decide which one is the concept name and which are synonyms.
Vocab-a-thon?