Stream: TestScript Resource
Topic: Testing Integration with Implementation Guides
Richard Ettema (May 18 2021 at 16:35):
Per our Connectathon 27 Session 2 discussion, this topic will focus on how we can integrate testing requirements into an implementation guide. The use of TestScript resources will be explored as a best practice but needs to allow for other testing paradigms.
I will be working on an example IG, not necessarily based on an existing IG, that will illustrate the use of TestScript resources linked via the new TestScript.scope element to the various IG conformance resources; e.g., StructureDefinition, etc. I'll let you know when I have something to show and where it's available.
John Moehrke (May 18 2021 at 16:42):
oh, I like that idea. conceptually I have been trying to drive this into IHE... I am however not convinced TestScript is the only solution. but where it is chosen as the solution it should be clear and well integrated into the IG build.
John Moehrke (May 18 2021 at 16:46):
when is this? did I miss it?
Richard Ettema (May 18 2021 at 18:35):
This is an action item I have taken on from our Session 2 meeting discussion we had today.
As TestScript is the FHIR resource type for test definitions, I'll be working on my example IG with TestScript as the primary example but, as you say, I'm trying to keep in mind that TestScript does not have to be the only solution. :wink:
ryan moehrke (May 18 2021 at 20:02):
Another related suggestion that I was suggesting we pair together with this is the idea that Rob brought up here <https://chat.fhir.org/#narrow/stream/274423-TestScript-Resource/topic/Fully.20specified.20vs.2E.20Abstract.20TestScripts/near/236868961> where a TestScript may have use outside of "Fully Specified" tests, where instead of explicitly listing out an executable test plan in the setup/test/teardown, the TestScript resource has meta information about the testing that is being provided and has some (new) way to link to that baked into the TestScript resource itself.
In that case using TestScript to link some testing to the ImplementationGuide should not be prescriptive in a way that would force the use of TestScript (as we know it today)
John Moehrke (May 18 2021 at 20:09):
yes, one tends to write the specification prior to the tests.. but here is where IG feature can be used, as one could have an IG dedicated to the testing definitions that imports the specification IG.
Jose Costa Teixeira (May 18 2021 at 21:03):
the discussion we had in IHE landed, afaik, on:
- requirements/criteria to be tested - we need something for that, possibly something that holds the gherkin magic
- tests themselves - i can only imagine TestScripts
Jose Costa Teixeira (May 18 2021 at 21:09):
Jose Costa Teixeira (May 18 2021 at 21:12):
the requirement or criterium can be narrative or structure, saying e.g. "a physician cannot update the prescription after it is dispened", or more implementable things like "Patient National ID is required".
Jose Costa Teixeira (May 18 2021 at 21:13):
(term "Acc. Criteria" comes from the acceptance criteria used in scrum user stories)
Jose Costa Teixeira (May 18 2021 at 21:13):
the computable specification is a profile, operationdef, etc.
Jose Costa Teixeira (May 18 2021 at 21:14):
the testScript is the executable AND/OR narrative way of executing the tests that are necessary to confirm this.
Jose Costa Teixeira (May 18 2021 at 21:14):
This should put us closer to supporting TDD
Richard Ettema (May 19 2021 at 12:12):
@Jose Costa Teixeira, I recently found out that NIST has built a FHIR testing tool call Asbestos that uses TestScript for testing the IHE MHD specification - https://github.com/usnistgov/asbestos. They have added some of their own unofficial extensions to TestScript that are defined on their GitHub wiki page - https://github.com/usnistgov/asbestos/wiki/TestScript-Extensions. Looks interesting. I'll need to review it in more detail going forward.
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
