Related to 14209 and 16364

The definitions for the concepts in the concept map equivalence value set reference the mapping itself rather than the concept(s) involved in the map. Based on the decision in 16364, this wording might change. This suggestions in this ticket are based on the existing text only, not on whether the direction of the map will be changed.

Wider:

Existing: The target mapping is wider in meaning than the source concept.

Suggested: Target concept meaning is wider than the source concept meaning.

Subsumes:

Existing: the target mapping subsumes the meaning of the source concept (e.g. the source is-a target)

Suggested: Target concept meaning subsumes source concept meaning.

Narrower:

Existing: The target mapping is narrower in meaning than the source concept. The sense in which mapping is narrower SHALLL be described in the comments in this case, and applications shold be careful when attempting to use these mappings operationally.

Suggested. Target concept meaning is narrower than the source concept meaning.

Specializes:

Existing: the target mapping specializes the meaning of the source concept (e.g. the target is-a source)

Suggested: Target concept meaning specializes the source concept meaning.

Equivalent and Equal:

Somehow clarify the differences between the two. The existing text is not sufficient. Trackers already exist (see 14209) for this. Definitions mean the same thing (equivalent) and are exactly the same (equal) do not distinguish between them.

Equivalent: The definitions of the concepts mean the same thing (including when structural implications of meaning are considered) (i.e. extensionally identical).

Equal: The definitions of the concepts are exactly the same (i.e. only grammatical differences) and structural implications of meaning are identical or irrelevant (i.e. intentionally identical).

Unmatched:

Existing: there is no match for this concept in the target code system.

Note that this existing text implies the direction is source to target (another example of confusing mapping direction in the documentation)

Suggested: No map exists for this concept in the target code system (note that in the definition for disjoint, the word 'mapping is used') However, if the target to source direction is kept, the suggesting definition is No map exists for this concept in the source code system.

Disjoint

Existing: This is an explicit assertion that there is no mapping between the source and target concepts

Suggested: Explicit assertion there is no map between the source and target concepts.

Related to:

Existing: The concepts are related to each other, and have at least some overlap in meaning, but the exact relationship is unknown.

No suggestion, will create separate tracker.