FHIR Chat · QA · committers

Stream: committers

Topic: QA

David Hay (Mar 05 2017 at 20:05):

Hi Guys, a reminder that the reviewed documents are starting to be transferred into dropbox folders for your attention. Ping me if you need to get access. You'll find that most documents contain reviews for many committees (because of the way they were generated) - especially true for value sets! Copies will have been placed in all the appropriate folders though (provided I did my job correctly) so just ignore the ones that don't apply to you...

Michelle (Moseman) Miller (Mar 07 2017 at 14:01):

Do we need to add comments in the doc to justify why we are not applying a suggested QA change? For example, https://chat.fhir.org/#narrow/stream/STU3-QA/topic/Value.20Set.20Copyright

Lloyd McKenzie (Mar 07 2017 at 17:45):

Nope. QA feedback is just a recommendation. Take it or leave it as you see fit. If someone really wants a change and a formal response to it, they need to use the change request mechanism.

David Hay (Mar 14 2017 at 00:17):

btw - a reminder that any changes should be applied by this coming sunday. A reminder that you only need look at the resources/modules that you have responsibility for in the documents - in many cases one document covered multiple committees, so I copied the doc into each committeee

David Hay (Mar 14 2017 at 00:18):

I also noticed that a number of the changes highlighted were related to formatting in the document rather than the underlying spec. These can be ignored...

John Moehrke (Mar 14 2017 at 14:57):

I have addressed Imaging, Privacy, and Security -- I will keep monitoring for any updates.

David Hay (Mar 15 2017 at 01:53):

thanks! And a reminder to others that you'll need an invite to the drop box folder where the reviewed documents are. Email me - david.hay@gmail.com or skype david.hay25 with your email...

David Hay (Mar 15 2017 at 01:53):

The reviews are still dribbling in...

Bryn Rhodes (Mar 17 2017 at 20:35):

CDS and CQI QA are done.

Grahame Grieve (Mar 17 2017 at 20:45):

grwat

Michelle (Moseman) Miller (Mar 17 2017 at 23:39):

Patient Care is done as well

Lloyd McKenzie (Mar 17 2017 at 23:43):

If anyone has extra bandwidth over the weekend, FHIR-I has lots :)

Richard Ettema (Mar 18 2017 at 02:03):

I might have some time tomorrow. Can you send me an invite from the site?

Lloyd McKenzie (Mar 18 2017 at 02:09):

Done

Richard Ettema (Mar 18 2017 at 02:09):

Thanks

David Hay (Mar 18 2018 at 23:36):

Hi Guys. I figure this is the best stream to reach out to those who need to apply the QA audits to the spec (Please copy if there is a better option).

As the files are reviewed, I copy them into a dropbox folder that you should all be able to access. Here's a link: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/yz10y5g9ta2gs9d/AADFy6L49UCuFqgKfwWA_3sUa?dl=0

I've organized the filenames so that it should be obvious which committee is responsible for applying changes. The file name patterns are:

{typename}-qa - the pages for a single resource. includes the definitions, pages, profiles
Terminology_{committee code} - terminology sorted by committee
allContentsSection{n} - all content (pages) other than resources. Chopped into 19 sections for ease of reviewing. I'm suspicious that FHIR-I is responsible for these
Datatypes-qa - FHIR-I

(note that reviewers often place their initials on the end of the filename)

As you apply the changes, could you rename (or delete) the files so we know they've been actioned? maybe preface them with 'done' - eg done_account-qa...

According to the [wiki] (http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=FHIR_Ballot_Prep) the date to apply starts 25 March, but there shouldn't be any overlap, so feel free to apply any time.

Let me know if there are any questions.

fhirQA2018Reviewed

Michelle (Moseman) Miller (Mar 28 2018 at 12:55):

@David Hay It looks like that dropbox folder is empty when I view it. Have you added the files reviewed?

David Hay (Mar 28 2018 at 17:02):

Oh poo. Try this one: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/x9dumdq44ljvx65/AABteSAyokR6x0Ay0T9R81Mga?dl=0

reviewedFiles

Melva Peters (Mar 28 2018 at 19:23):

There are changes identified that don't seem to be in the spreadsheets. For example for Medication.ingredient.id and ingredient.extension. Is there a central place that changes should be made (capitalization, etc).

Grahame Grieve (Mar 28 2018 at 19:25):

what exactly is the change?

Melva Peters (Mar 28 2018 at 19:31):

I've attached the qa document. I identified the same changes for other resources.
medication-qa_sc.docx

Grahame Grieve (Mar 28 2018 at 20:38):

ok so those changes are proposals to apply QA to the base data types.

Melva Peters (Mar 28 2018 at 20:39):

Okay...I'll make the other changes

Eric Haas (Mar 28 2018 at 23:28):

ServiceRequest is missing. Is it not done yet?

Michelle (Moseman) Miller (Mar 29 2018 at 13:52):

@Grahame Grieve I see the same as Melva in my QA document for CommunicationRequest.payload.id (essentially the ask is to update Element.id definition, such that unique is capitalized to Unique as the first word in the definition)

Michelle (Moseman) Miller (Mar 29 2018 at 13:58):

Were extensions included in the QA review? The resource-specific QA documents end with a heading for "Extension Definitions" but nothing follows.

Michelle (Moseman) Miller (Mar 29 2018 at 16:07):

FYI - I have skipped updating displays for codes (questionable whether those are truly non-substantive). That said, I got comments saying that code displays were inconsistent across code systems - sometimes Entered In Error and sometimes Entered in Error. Which is correct?

Michelle (Moseman) Miller (Mar 29 2018 at 17:33):

@David Hay PC has 5 resources that are marked as review completed in the spreadsheet, but I don't see them in the DropBox. Is it safe to assume (or just my wishful thinking) that those resources don't have any changes needed? For example: CarePlan, CareTeam, ClinicalImpression, Communication, and Flag.

David Hay (Mar 29 2018 at 18:17):

@Michelle (Moseman) Miller wishful thinking I'm afraid! A combination of some reviewed items I missd in my email, and ones just arrived from Wes (super-review-hero) Rishel

John Moehrke (Mar 29 2018 at 18:23):

ah, I asked via email the same question...

John Moehrke (Mar 29 2018 at 18:25):

The allContent* files are much harder to manage on the 'applied' side. I found security stuff across 12 and 13, but not excusive. So how are we going to handle these fractional portions of the allContent* files?

David Hay (Mar 29 2018 at 19:05):

The problem is that it's not easy to pull out the 'security-related' pages from the build (as far as I can tell), I had assumed that most of the 'all content' files would be FHIR-I responsibility anyway... as they're all non-resource type files...

David Hay (Mar 29 2018 at 19:07):

BTW - if there are files marked as reviewed in the spreadsheet, but not present in the folder them let me know - I may have not copied it across. I think that next time around I'll get reviewers to copy files directly into the folder, and take me out of the loop...

Michelle (Moseman) Miller (Mar 29 2018 at 19:34):

@David Hay ok, thanks for the confirmation that I'm a dreamer :)

Melva Peters (Mar 29 2018 at 19:37):

For the allContent files, is it better if one person worked on all changes in 1 or more of the files? I'm happy to take a stab at fixing a set of them. Thoughts?

David Hay (Mar 29 2018 at 20:16):

We're all dreamers in one sense or another!

John Moehrke (Mar 29 2018 at 20:41):

@David Hay I don't see the ii.html file. one Wes would have done

Christopher Schuler (Mar 29 2018 at 22:33):

I am working on the activitydefinition-qa-SH doc. I noticed several comments for "Field Code Changed" in the introduction. I am unsure what action to take there if any is required. The activitydefinition-introduction.xml seems to align with the doc.

David Hay (Mar 30 2018 at 01:22):

@John Moehrke - will look into it...

Michelle (Moseman) Miller (Mar 30 2018 at 02:38):

@David Hay FYI - It looks like Condition has now finished review, but I don't see it in the DropBox yet.

David Hay (Mar 30 2018 at 18:03):

sorted...

David Hay (Mar 31 2018 at 19:13):

@Melva Peters - just saw your comment - that sounds like a good idea - just make a start and mark in the 'changes applied' column when done...

David Hay (Mar 31 2018 at 19:14):

(and make a note when starting so others don't pick the same as you)

David Hay (Mar 31 2018 at 19:14):

Hopefully other noble appliers will help out!

David Hay (Mar 31 2018 at 19:17):

(This was about applying changes to the 'allContentOneFile' files - (not that well named in retrospect, you can probably guess the history... )

Melva Peters (Apr 01 2018 at 16:20):

@David Hay I'll start working through, but I'm not sure how much I'll get done over the course of the day. I'm marking in the Google sheet which ones I'm working on as well as making notes if there are some that have not been applied.

Rob Hausam (Apr 01 2018 at 16:39):

@Melva Peters If you want you can ping me as you run across stuff for me to apply. I'm working on the IPS IG and will also be applying QA throughout the day.

Melva Peters (Apr 01 2018 at 16:40):

@Rob Hausam if you have time to work on some of the AllContentSection updates. I've started at the top with Section 1 and Section 2. Maybe you can start at the bottom. I've added a column to the spreadsheet "Working on" so you can mark which ones you're working on and then mark them complete when applied.