To agree the useful scope and requirements to ensure that the generic Validation service will prove fit for purpose for the community.
1. What should the scope and target be for a generic Validation service
2. What technology platform would be most appropriate
3. What should the high level rules be, for packaging format, content, etc
Original Terminology Release Advisory Group discussion: https://confluence.ihtsdotools.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=38245085
|RVF Assertion list 20181015.xlsx||1||2018-10-16 21:20|
|SNOMED International Proposed Shared Validation Service Assertion list 20181017.xlsx||1||2018-10-17 22:08|
Good news is that we now have the baseline Assertion list for the SI internal validation service, including the new automated assertions currently going through final verification before deployment.
I've tried to make it as useful as possible, so it includes not just the description of each assertion, but also what type of assertion it is and what group it currently resides in - plus a link to the relevant SQL file in Git so that you can go and look at the code itself if you need more info than is provided in the description (FYI you might need to copy/paste the URL's out rather than just clicking on them, depending on whether or not you're using Windows or OSX):
Can I please, therefore, ask Chris Morris, Suzy Roy + Matt Cordell/Dion McMurtrie to go ahead with the comparison of these assertions against all of your local validation, and post the results here asap with the following information: