I’m working in the HiGHmed conformance test framework data sets. One of the templates we use as an example is the RIPPLE conformance template. This template has some issues, some might come from missing checks on modeling tools, like the is_integral function appearing as an attribute constraint for DV_PROPORTION.
Another issue is a DV_CODED_TEXT has a constraint code ac0001 but that doesn’t have a definition/binding to any terminology.
My question is if that is even valid?
IMO that shouldn’t be valid since it doesn’t make sense to define a terminological constraint that is open. Maybe at the archetype level that could be valid, because the specific terminology might be unknown or modelers want to give the implementers the possibility of choosing whatever terminology they want for that node, but at the template level I don’t see the point.
This is a similar case for another issue I found in a template we use for vallidation: Is terminology_id=local compatible to not specifying a code list in the archetype?