Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Allow providing map and models in the $transform operation #308

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 14, 2024
Merged

Conversation

qligier
Copy link
Member

@qligier qligier commented Nov 8, 2024

Fixes #305

We are not compatible with the official $transform operation because Brian's FHIRPath Lab uses resource instead of content, and we have not implemented all R5 parameters.

But this PR allows connecting Brian's FHIRPath Lab to Matchbox.

@qligier qligier added the enhancement New feature or request label Nov 8, 2024
@qligier qligier requested a review from oliveregger November 8, 2024 09:22
@qligier qligier self-assigned this Nov 8, 2024
Copy link
Member

@oliveregger oliveregger left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks!

Could we add in addition test cases for the transform operation:

  • one with the "traditional" matchbox call where we have the source paramater
  • one which mimics the behaviour of brian fhir mapper?

added to the different API tests?

https://github.com/ahdis/matchbox/blob/main/matchbox-server/src/test/java/ch/ahdis/matchbox/test/MatchboxApiR4Test.java

there is a test ig where the we can put the example map inside:

https://github.com/ahdis/matchbox/blob/main/matchbox-server/src/test/resources/matchbox.health.test.ig.r4-0.1.0.tgz

source is in https://github.com/ahdis/matchbox-test-ig/tree/master

@qligier
Copy link
Member Author

qligier commented Nov 8, 2024

Sure!

Do we need to also split the provider between R4, R4B and R5 versions?
Currently, we parse everything as R5, although the engine supports having different contexts for the source and target. I don't see how you could provide an R5 StructureMap, and R4 models in the same Parameter resource.

@oliveregger
Copy link
Member

I think all R5 should be fine (SD are normative), and we return the output of the mapping in the required version.

@qligier qligier merged commit e3c4e04 into main Nov 14, 2024
7 of 8 checks passed
@qligier qligier deleted the issue-305 branch November 14, 2024 10:09
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

FML: Extend transformation API to support model parameter
2 participants