# invariants of datatypes.quantity.DvOrdered

**Category:** [Reference Implementation: Java (archive)](https://discourse.openehr.org/c/reference-implementation-java-archive/154)
**Created:** 2007-11-15 21:19 UTC
**Views:** 2
**Replies:** 2
**URL:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/invariants-of-datatypes-quantity-dvordered/15999

---

## Post #1 by @system

Hi Sergio,

Thanks for the report, please find my comments below.


> Hi,
>
> I have the following observations regarding class DvOrdered:
>
> 1) Method isNormal() checks only if normalRange contains current DvOrdered, but omits the situation where normalStatus is present.
>
> One possibility is to change the method implementation to:
>
> public boolean isNormal() {
>
> return ((normalRange == null) ? false : getNormalRange().has(this)) ||
>
> ((normalStatus == null) ? false : normalStatus.getCodeString().equals("N"));
>
> }

Yes, the current isNormal() implementation isn't complete according to the specification.

The pre-condition for this method is (normal_range != null || normal_status !=null). So I think the method shouldn't just return false when both are null. Maybe should throw some kind of exception to indicate the pre-condition is not met.

> 2) Method isSimple() checks only if otherReferenceRanges is null. It should also check if normalRange is null.

Yes, it will be fixed.

> 3) The invariants **Normal_status_validity** and **Normal_range_and_status**_**consistency** are not warranted.
>
> You could add a method like validateNormalStatus (see below) and call it in the constructor. To do this you should get a reference to a terminologyService. If you do this in the constructor, you'll have to propagate it all the way down the hierarchy.
>
> private void validateNormalStatus(CodePhrase status) {
>
> if (status != null) {
>
> if (terminologyService == null) {
>
> throw new IllegalArgumentException("null terminologyService");
>
> }
>
> if (!terminologyService.codeSetForID(
>
> "normal statuses").hasCode(status)) {
>
> throw new IllegalArgumentException(
>
> "unknown code for normalStatus: " + status.getCodeString());
>
> }
>
> }
>
> }
>
> For normal range and status consistency, one possibility is to have a method like that below that should be called in the constructors of the concrete classes.
>
> private void checkNormalRangeAndStatusConsistency(DvInterval<T> normalRange) {
>
> if ((normalRange != null) && (normalStatus() != null)) {
>
> if (normalStatus.getCodeString().equals("N") ^ (normalRange.has(this)) {
>
> throw new IllegalStateException("normal status not consistent with normal range");
>
> }
>
> }
>
> }

These look alright. I will probably add a testcase for this.

> These checks should also be done in the corresponding setters, unless you make the attributes final.

That's right.

Cheers,
Rong

---

## Post #2 by @system

Hi Rong,

I am sending this e-mail direct to you because I am away from work and I could not post to the list using the e-mail I subscribed to it.

I agree with your remarks regarding method isNormal().

In relation to the invariant **Normal_range_and_status**_**consistency**, I added the following test to class DvQuantityTest:

public void testNormalStatusAndNormalRangeConsistency() {
CodePhrase normalStatusN = new CodePhrase(new TerminologyID("mock"), "N");
CodePhrase normalStatusOther = new CodePhrase(new TerminologyID("mock"), "A");
DvQuantity lowerLimit1 = new DvQuantity("mg", 10, 2, ms);
DvQuantity lowerLimit2 = new DvQuantity("mg", 30, 2, ms);
DvQuantity upperLimit = new DvQuantity("mg", 50, 2, ms);
DvInterval<DvQuantity> normalRangeHas = new DvInterval<DvQuantity>(lowerLimit1, upperLimit);
DvInterval<DvQuantity> normalRangeHasNot = new DvInterval<DvQuantity>(lowerLimit2, upperLimit);
DvQuantity testQuantity1 = new DvQuantity(null, normalRangeHas, normalStatusN, ts, null, 0.0, false, "mg", 15, 2, ms);
DvQuantity testQuantity2 = new DvQuantity(null, normalRangeHasNot, normalStatusOther, ts, null, 0.0, false, "mg", 15, 2, ms);
try {
DvQuantity testQuantity3 = new DvQuantity(null, normalRangeHas, normalStatusOther, ts, null, 0.0, false, "mg", 15, 2, ms);
fail("exception should be thrown");
} catch (Exception ex) {
assertTrue(ex instanceof IllegalStateException);

}
try {
DvQuantity testQuantity4 = new DvQuantity(null, normalRangeHasNot, normalStatusN, ts, null, 0.0, false, "mg", 15, 2, ms);
fail("exception should be thrown");
} catch (Exception ex) {

assertTrue(ex instanceof IllegalStateException);
}

}

Besides, I changed the method below in class TestTerminologyService:

public CodeSetAccess codeSetForId(String id) {
return new TestCodeSetAccess();
}

Regards,

Sergio

Rong Chen escreveu:

---

## Post #3 by @system

Hi Sergio,

Thanks for the test case. It's very much appreciated! I am splitting it into several several finer tests and including them in DvOrderedTest. While I am testing the a new component that provides minimum openEHR terminology support, I found anomalies to do with code phrase validation in several places. I will commit the changes when they are fixed.

Cheers,
Rong

---


**Canonical:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/invariants-of-datatypes-quantity-dvordered/15999
**Original content:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/invariants-of-datatypes-quantity-dvordered/15999