Stream: Touchstone
Topic: Some issues and questions regarding R3
Ozan KÖSE (Apr 26 2017 at 12:43):
We have just completed testing our Fhir server with the latest Touchstone spec and I would like to congratulate the Touchstone team for this instant release of STU3 tests. Regarding the latest release, there are some questions/issues I would like to address;
- When we exclude unsupported features from Conformance dashboard; _include and chained parameter tests of Provider Directories is
disabled even though our Capability Statement has ’searchInclude’ fields for each resource. What should we add to our Capability Statement
to enable _include and chained parameter tests?
- At _include parameter tests of Provider Directories, there is a statement that says “Bundle.total should be greater than 1” which means
included resources should be count for the Bundle.total but the spec states Bundle.total is only affected by matched resources
(https://www.hl7.org/fhir/search.html#count).
- Even though our Capability Statement does not support “patch” interaction, patch tests seem to be supported in Conformance Dashboard.
- Basic Xml update tests of Location, Claim and ClaimResponse sends resources with decimals that have trailing zeros at its fraction part but
our server clears those trailing zeros and therefore the tests are marked as fail (For example, when Location resource with longitude
42.256500 has sent to our server our response would be Location resource with longitude 42.2565). Shouldn’t be a giving a warning message
better than failing the tests?
Richard Ettema (Apr 27 2017 at 15:01):
@Ozan KÖSE Thank you for your use and feedback on Touchstone. We are reviewing your issues and have created an AEGIS internal Touchstone JIRA tracking ticket for these items (TS-319). I'll reply back as soon as we have any resolutions to report. Thanks again.
Richard Ettema (May 03 2017 at 00:43):
@Ozan KÖSE I just announced the deployment of Touchstone v3.4.4 with support for FHIR v3.0.1. Included in this release are updates / modifications for your reported issues:
- The _include and chained search parameters are now recognized on the Conformance Dashboard per resource type as defined in the server's CapabilityStatement
- _include parameter Provider Directories tests now correctly test for Bundle.total
- patch operation type is now recognized on the Conformance Dashboard per resource type as defined in the server's CapabilityStatement
- Basic XML update tests for Claim, ClaimResponse and Location resource types now correctly process decimal values with trailing zeros
Ozan KÖSE (May 05 2017 at 08:48):
@Richard Ettema Thank you for your immediate interest on issues. We are very fond of your work and support to the community. I’ve just finished executing the tests that are published for FHIR 3.0.1. There are some issues I would like to address;
- _include parameter tests now have a statement that checks “Bundle.total.toInteger() >= entry.size()” but I think it should be “<=” since when the bundle has some included entries, the size of Bundle.entry would always be greater than Bundle.total. To examplify, when the bundle has 1 matched and 1 included resources, the size of Bundle.entry is 2 but the Bundle.total value should be 1.
- Touchstone still does not capture our server's _include and _revInclude support. As I realized, some public servers like HAPI adds _include and _revInclude parameters to search parameter list of each resource (i.e. CapabilityStatement.rest.resource.searchParam) to state that the server supports these parameters for the particular resource, and right now Touchstone checks this field as well. However, I understand from the specification that if searchInclude and searchRevInclude fields are defined for a particular resource, _include and _revInclude parameters are supported for that resource. See (https://www.hl7.org/fhir/capabilitystatement-definitions.html#CapabilityStatement.rest.resource.searchInclude and also https://www.hl7.org/fhir/capabilitystatement-definitions.html#CapabilityStatement.rest.resource.searchRevInclude): "If this list is empty, the server does not support includes." and "reverse includes for the latter). We use these fields as defined and used in the full capability statement of FHIR; you can check via http://app.srdc.com.tr/fhir/stu3/metadata. So, what I would like to ask is; should we explicitly add _include, _revInclude to the list of search parameters for each resource, i.e. within rest.resource.searchParam, which are in fact not search parameters but search result parameters? What do you think?
Richard Ettema (May 11 2017 at 13:56):
@Ozan KÖSE For our internal review of these issues we have created an AEGIS internal Touchstone JIRA tracking ticket for these items (TS-333).
Richard Ettema (May 11 2017 at 13:57):
After the Connectathon event this past weekend, Mario and I had the opportunity to discuss these with members of the FHIR Management Group (FMG) and FHIR community. While we wait for guidance from the FHIR Management Group our response is:
Richard Ettema (May 11 2017 at 13:57):
While "searchInclude" provides a way to declare support for "_include", it’s not clear how support for other search result parameters ("_sort", "_count", "_summary", "_elements", "_contained", and "_containedType") would be declared in a capability statement other than to declare them in the searchParam list. If those search result parameters are to be declared in searchParam list, then it probably makes sense to declare "_include" and "_revinclude" as well in searchParam list for consistency.
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
