Stream: terminology
Topic: Input parameter 'display' in valueset/$validate-code
Senthil Nachimuthu (Nov 28 2017 at 17:12):
The input parameter 'display' (0..1 string) in valueset/$validate-code is described as "The display associated with the code, if provided. If a display is provided a code must be provided. If no display is provided, the server cannot validate the display value, but may choose to return a recommended display name in an extension in the outcome. Whether displays are case sensitive is code system dependent"
The valueset resource defines display (0..1 string) as "Text to display for this code for this value set in this valueset" (ref: valueset.
So, for the $validate-code operation, should the terminology server only search the Valueset.compose.include.concept.display descriptions, or all descriptions of the code? It has been discussed here and elsewhere that a value set only tells which concepts are its members, and doesn't say anything about what concept descriptions are included. So, may I request clarification on what concept descriptions should be searched for $validate-code with input parameter 'display', please. Is it only the display that's included in the value set or all descriptions from the code system for the matching concept? Thanks!
Grahame Grieve (Nov 28 2017 at 23:41):
I think that if the value set specifies a display, then that's what you validate against
Michael Lawley (Nov 28 2017 at 23:51):
In addition to those from the CodeSystem, or instead of those from the CodeSystem?
Grahame Grieve (Nov 29 2017 at 07:36):
I think instead. Though there could be an extension on the value set to make a rule about that
Rob Hausam (Nov 29 2017 at 11:41):
I think that Grahame's suggestion regarding expected behavior (i.e. "instead") when the 'display' parameter is used probably makes sense. But do we think that designations (compose.include.concept.designation) should also be included, if they have been defined? I would assume that would be the case. I am also wondering about the overlap between CodeSystem and ValueSet here. Theoretically, I assume that you could create display and designation terms in the code system and then completely override them in the value set. That doesn't seem to me like especially desirable behavior, but maybe it is and should be allowable (and presumably would be an edge case)? At the very least we probably need to say more about how the similar capabilities in CodeSytem and ValueSet interact (I think that's something that we neglected to do when CodeSystem was added).
Grahame Grieve (Nov 29 2017 at 15:22):
I think it's desired behavior. What we can say for sure that it's often a bad idea, and it can be done really badly, but sometimes it's a really good idea. I do think we need to document this as you say.
Michael Lawley (Nov 30 2017 at 11:04):
Is anyone able to share some examples of where this capability is used? Either overriding the display or adding/replacing designations?
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
