ECL relationship group 0 mapping about snowstorm HOT 4 CLOSED

To add some more info here, Snow Owl v5 produces the same results as snowstorm v2.0.0 for both queries on the 2018-07-31 release. Snow Owl also produces the same results for the Swedish 2018-11-30 edition as Snowstorm v2.1.0 above.

Final comment edit... @danka74 the ECL query functionality in the snapshot-rest-api is far behind anything else and is deprecated so I would not recommend using it.

from snowstorm.

Hi @danka74,
I've responded on Confluence but will dual post here.

If the SLPG group agrees that any attribute which is grouped in the MRCM Attribute Domain reference set should be treated as grouped for ECL query purposes I would be happy to change the Snowstorm implementation.

Cheers.

from snowstorm.

This is a confirmed bug because the ECL specification was not correctly interpreted. It should be fixed. The July 2019 release of the International Edition of SNOMED CT will introduce explicit grouping of all attributes which are marked as grouped in the MRCM so this problem will resolve itself, but it would be nice to have correct ECL evaluation against existing SNOMED releases.

from snowstorm.

This has resolved itself in the July 2019 International release and any extension which uses it because self grouped attributes which were in group 0 are now explicitly self grouped using a non zero group number.

from snowstorm.