There needs to be better ways of Include/Excluding Supp Domains

[SFJohnson24]

Rule Information

• Standard:SDTMIG
• Rule ID:CG0017 CG0140

Describe the bug Currently in rule editor Supp domains are assigned their dataset name as the domain. https://github.com/cdisc-org/conformance-rules-editor/pull/232 This PR rolled back the fix for that issue as it broke several published rules. We need a defined way to ID supp domains in engine.

Error returned from Rule Engine CG0017 gives incorrect issues as it perceives SUPP-- as a name that is too long due to SUPP-- domain not being excluded CG0140 skips validation as it looks to include the domain SUPP--, when the RDOMAIN is correctly extracted from the data it SUPP-- as a domain does not exist.

[SFJohnson24]

I believe the easiest way would be to add a 'include_supp_dataset' flag to to the domains portion of scope. This would look like: "Scope": { "Domains": include_split_datasets: false include_supp_datasets: true } This would replace the use of SUPP-- as a domain in scope that can be excluded and included and the flag would allow us to correctly grab the RDOMAIN off the supp. This would involve edits to:

• the Rule Schema
• the rule processor (specifically the rule_applies_to_domain, domain_matched_ap_or_supp, is_domain_name_included functions)
• the validate_single_rule in rule processor (specifically is_suitable_for_validation call).

[SFJohnson24]

After working with this ticket, it appears the issue with CG0140 is 2 fold:

• the first being the above described issue with IDing SUPP datasets
• the second is the supp and parent are not merging properly