FHIR Chat · Validator Download Problem · fmg

Stream: fmg

Topic: Validator Download Problem


view this post on Zulip Grahame Grieve (Feb 01 2019 at 01:50):

So in response to feedback from the implementers, James and I have moved the FHIR validator so that it's released through Maven.

So, to be clear:

  • in the past, the validator was built as part of the spec build, and you downloaded the correct file from http://build.fhir.org/validator.zip
  • the file was always called validator.zip or org.hl7.fhir.validator.jar (once you unzipped it)
  • we didn't archive past versions of the validator

Now:

view this post on Zulip Grahame Grieve (Feb 01 2019 at 01:51):

that's all good. but.....

view this post on Zulip Grahame Grieve (Feb 01 2019 at 01:52):

we don't want people using old releases of the validator. In fact, they often don't work. We want them using the current version, which we support, and which validates for releasse 2, 3 and 4. (and May2016, but that doesn't count for this discussion)

view this post on Zulip Grahame Grieve (Feb 01 2019 at 01:53):

I've gone through and replaced the download links for those published versions to http://hl7.org/fhir/validator, which is a permalink that presently redirects to http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=Using_the_FHIR_Validator (i can do that as product manager - that is, I can fix external links). I will maintain that wiki page to provide wahtever are the crispest download instructions we can come up with)

view this post on Zulip Grahame Grieve (Feb 01 2019 at 01:54):

that leaves 2 questions:

view this post on Zulip Grahame Grieve (Feb 01 2019 at 01:54):

the problem with http://hl7.org/fhir/validation.html#jar is that the script says:

view this post on Zulip Grahame Grieve (Feb 01 2019 at 01:54):

wget http://build.fhir.org/validator.zip

view this post on Zulip Grahame Grieve (Feb 01 2019 at 01:55):

which is now broken. And I can't simply fix either, since this is not an external link, it's actual standards narrative (status = informative)

view this post on Zulip Grahame Grieve (Feb 01 2019 at 01:57):

with regard to question #1 we can

  • leave it as is, and assume people will figure it out somehow
  • FMG can authorise to just fix the external link with a reference to downloads so it's robust
  • FMG could decide that this is a technical correction and needs to exercise the full technical correction machinery including TSC approval
  • something else?

I don't want to do a technical correction for R2. please. We have to do one soonish for R3 and R4, so we coud just do it as part of those.

view this post on Zulip Grahame Grieve (Feb 01 2019 at 01:58):

with regard to the ballot milestone versions that are not actually supported.... we can....

  • do nothing; it's should be obvious they're not supported
  • beef up the note at the top of the page (just the validation page, or all pages) about it not actually being supported anymore
  • fix the text directly

note: I am not doing technical corrections for these milestone versions

view this post on Zulip Lloyd McKenzie (Feb 01 2019 at 02:09):

I think we need to ask Wayne & Austin whether we can just go ahead and fix without TSC approval. FMG shouldn't try to make that call on its own. I think beefing up the note is reasonable wrt question #2


Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC