While using our Validator Demo, I tuned the settings so I forced it to use the suggested ontoserver terminology service. (Change..., select ontoserver, unmark try built-in terminology service first). I then got an error:
[WARNING] Terminology service failed while validating code 'document': Operation was unsuccessful because of a client error (BadRequest). OperationOutcome: Overall result: FAILURE (1 errors and 0 warnings)
[ERROR] [0fae8088-1d94-4c30-941e-13ac57ca8a14]: $validate-code must not specify more than one of the valueSet, the context, and the url parameters.(further diagnostics: [0fae8088-1d94-4c30-941e-13ac57ca8a14]: $validate-code must not specify more than one of the valueSet, the context, and the url parameters.)
[INFORMATION] (no details)(further diagnostics: X-Request-Id: 7a0a10b0-16cd-4050-b4dd-533a84541aa2)
. (at Bundle.type[0], element Bundle(http://example.org/StructureDefinition/DocumentBundle).type)
It seems we're providing too many parameters to the $validate-code call (while our internal terminology service accepts it). We should make sure we send legal calls to ontoserver (since I believe they have a great implementation) that is also sufficient for our built-in TS.
While using our Validator Demo, I tuned the settings so I forced it to use the suggested ontoserver terminology service. (Change..., select ontoserver, unmark try built-in terminology service first). I then got an error:
It seems we're providing too many parameters to the $validate-code call (while our internal terminology service accepts it). We should make sure we send legal calls to ontoserver (since I believe they have a great implementation) that is also sufficient for our built-in TS.