UHM-7475, configure person relationships widget with a specific type #129
Conversation
| limit: 10, | ||
| q: request.term, | ||
| v: 'custom:(id,uuid,display,gender,age)' | ||
| }, function (result) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It looks to me like you are configuring this widget with a gender property, but I don't see where you are actually limiting the results to persons that match this gender. Shouldn't that be done in a filter here?
|
|
||
| import org.codehaus.jackson.annotate.JsonProperty; | ||
|
|
||
| public class RegisterPersonRelationshipWidget extends Widget{ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nitpick, but if you can run a formatter on this file to clean up the spacing before/after curly braces, between methods, between properties, etc that would be good. It seems a bit inconsistent.
| this.config = config; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| public static class Config { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
See my comments on the pihcore PR. Basically, let's make this a top-level class named PersonRelationshipConfig and also add the label property you have on the config in the other PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@mseaton I would think it makes sense to keep this like it is, because it follows the existing pattern used for the other widgets? Or am I missing something?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok, fine if that's what we've done...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @cioan ! Looks like the right approach to me. Agree with Mike about gender, but assume that this is because this is a work-in-progress and hasn't been implemented.
I'm guessing the "type" property is to specific whether it is an "a_is_to_b" or "b_is_to_a" relationship, which we will need when specifying whether you are selecting the "Parent' or "Child" in a "Parent/Child" relationship.
But, yes, looks like the right approach in general!
|
|
||
| public static class Config { | ||
| @JsonProperty | ||
| private String type; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What does type property refer to?
| private String relationshipType; | ||
|
|
||
| @JsonProperty | ||
| private String gender; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this limits the people returns by gender, if specified? (makes sense, as long as null is allowed, just clarifying)
|
Thank you @mseaton and @mogoodrich ! I have implemented the gender filtering: I also removed the "type" property and reformatted the code. I kept the inner Config class per @mogoodrich comment that this is the current pattern implemented for all the other widgets. Please let me know if you would like to discuss this further. |
|
I have updated the widget so the direction of the relationship could be configured. And, therefore, now we are able to configure the widget to record a child of the patient: 
|
|
Hi @mseaton and @mogoodrich , in the latest commit, I added the capability to record multiple relationships of the same type by leveraging the "multipleValues" configuration property:
Please let me know what you think. I still need to implement the removeRelationship function and to figure out the display Template for the Confirm page. But now, we are able to record multiple children of a patient using the registration form. |
|
Screenshots look great to me @cioan ! |
|
Thanks @mseaton ! I am going to merge in all those pending PRs so they have time to propagate to test servers over the weekend. |
No description provided.