dhis2-devs team mailing list archive

[Ime Asangansi <asangansi@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Bob, the pdf is useful.

When you mean codes, you mean the unique id for the record?

Secondly, +1 for an internal routine to assign ids

Thirdly, please how are you generating the dxf for ihris? 

Thanks

Ime


--- On Thu, 9/15/11, Bob Jolliffe <bobjolliffe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



This will also streamline metedata generation because one will only need to generate and pass metadata for only de/ou/period.

But I wonder; what's the difference between orgunitId and orgunit in your example.



That's a typo.  Please take a look at the pdf file I sent out earlier this week as that is more correct.
 

Also, some elements don't use any categories, but the model references a default categorycombo. How will that look in your proposed schema?


The default categorycombo is just that - default.  So in the absence of any categories the categorycombo is automatically set to default when saving datavalues. 


Would you branch Jo's code in a way we could use easily test yours as a module? or...


The reading of this format is already implemented in the import/export module.  It is tightly coupled with Jo's code in the sense of making use of the same element/attribute name strings defined in his beans.  So you can already use it by just importing the xml file.  To test you should ideally set up some codes in your database.  We should try and do this in the demo instance so people can try it there.  Meanwhile I would suggest to test:


(i) pick an orgunit and assign it a code if it does not already have one (eg ou1)
(ii) pick a small dataset and assign it a code (eg dataset1)
(iii) assign codes to the dataelements within the dataset
(iv) assign the dataset to the orgunit


Then you should be able to import datavaluesets according to the examples given.

Alternatively you can use the existing uuids instead of the codes.

(It might be worth having a startup routine which automatically assigns codes based on the existing internal ids where they do not already exist.)


Regards
Bob
 


Thanks

Ime

--- On Thu, 9/1/11, Bob Jolliffe <bobjolliffe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The implication of adding all the above will be that whereas
 the
datavalueset above will remain valid (except perhaps shifting to
storedBy), the following would also be valid:

<dataValueSets orgUnitId="code" dataElementId="internal"
  <dataValueSet  orgUnit="23" period="201004" storedBy="Bob" >

    <dataValue dataElement="2" value="4" Sex="1" />
    <dataValue dataElement="2" value="5" Sex="2"/>
    <dataValue dataElement="4" value="43" Sex="1" Age="3" />

    <dataValue dataElement="5" value="44" Sex="1" Age="3" />
  </dataValueSet>
</dataValueSets>

I am pretty sure I can implement the above without breaking what is

currently there.  One possible but minor breaking change I would
suggest to improving parsing of very large datasets might be to
abbreviate some well known element names to dv, de and v
 for
compactness.