You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hello! I have been running some tests against different openEHR implementations using a fork of the test suite at https://github.com/ehrbase/integration-tests and have stumbled on a few things that seem a bit "off" with EHRBase, so plan to submit some bugs to try and start the discussions going on them!
First is that from what I can tell (without at all being an "expert" on this) is that it seems like the ehr_status reference that is being returned from the /ehr endpoint in EHRBase is returning an instance of EHR_STATUS instead of an instance of OBJECT_REF
I understand that this might have quite a bit of impact/reach as it is a relatively fundamental thing here, so maybe it is good if someone can investigate this properly and make sure everything looks right compared to the spec vs not?
For example with the ehr_status attribute uid vs id, what I see in EHRBase is that a request to /ehr is returning this:
..."ehr_status": {
"uid": "..."...
}
...
But from what I can see both in the REST API spec and the SM / BASE specification it seems like it should be id instead?
Response's ehr_status object seems to be of type EHR_STATUS and does not have all of the same attributes as OBJECT_REF (for example that $.ehr_status.uid is given instead of $.ehr_status.id)
I did not see it returned in the response, but wonder if there is any case for /ehr to return the ehr_access object, and if so, if it might have the same issue? As per the spec it is the same object type (OBJECT_REF) which should be returned there as well (and not EHR_ACCESS)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
These were mentioning that "... The new EHR resource is returned in the body when the request's Prefer header value is return=representation, otherwise only headers are returned ...", which implies the RM structure of the EHR, for example:
Hello! I have been running some tests against different openEHR implementations using a fork of the test suite at https://github.com/ehrbase/integration-tests and have stumbled on a few things that seem a bit "off" with EHRBase, so plan to submit some bugs to try and start the discussions going on them!
First is that from what I can tell (without at all being an "expert" on this) is that it seems like the
ehr_status
reference that is being returned from the/ehr
endpoint in EHRBase is returning an instance of EHR_STATUS instead of an instance of OBJECT_REFI understand that this might have quite a bit of impact/reach as it is a relatively fundamental thing here, so maybe it is good if someone can investigate this properly and make sure everything looks right compared to the spec vs not?
For example with the
ehr_status
attributeuid
vsid
, what I see in EHRBase is that a request to/ehr
is returning this:But from what I can see both in the REST API spec and the SM / BASE specification it seems like it should be
id
instead?Environment information
Steps to reproduce
Create an EHR using the REST API and fetch it using either:
/ehr
with headerPrefer: return=representation
, or/ehr
then GET to/ehr/:ehr_id
(for example by runing the following command against the default EHRBase service from the docker-compose example)
Actual result
Response's
ehr_status
object seems to be of type EHR_STATUS and does not have all of the same attributes as OBJECT_REF (for example that$.ehr_status.uid
is given instead of$.ehr_status.id
)Expected result
The
ehr_status
object in the response from/ehr
should be an instance of OBJECT_REF instead, per the REST API specification.Further information
I did not see it returned in the response, but wonder if there is any case for
/ehr
to return theehr_access
object, and if so, if it might have the same issue? As per the spec it is the same object type (OBJECT_REF) which should be returned there as well (and not EHR_ACCESS)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: