RE: [HAPI-devel] RE: HAPI

[Tripp, B. <Bry...@uh...>]

Hi Ester, 
 
Sorry you waited so long for a response!  There was a mistake in my address
the first time, so I never got the message.  
 
RDT is a strange little wart in HL7.  As Alexei said, you can deal with it
using a custom message definition.  Or if you can wait, then HAPI 0.4, which
should be out in May, will handle it automatically. 
 
Thanks, 
Bryan 

-----Original Message-----
From: Guevara, Alexei [mailto:Ale...@uh...]
Sent: April 24, 2003 6:23 PM
To: 'hl7...@li...'
Subject: [HAPI-devel] RE: HAPI


Hi Ester
 
HAPI supports the overriding standard messages definitions (it looks like
that's what you need to the problem). To find out how to do it, you can
check the javadoc of the method Parser.findMessageClass.
 
aLeX6
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ester Cohen [mailto:ES...@co...] 
Sent: April 24, 2003 5:53 PM
To: 'agu...@us...'; 'tbr...@us...';
'da...@us...'; 'jaz...@us...';
'leu...@us...'; 'lm...@us...';
'nac...@us...'; 'hl7...@li...'
Subject: FW: HAPI


Please someone response 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas J Lukasik [mailto:tlu...@da...] 
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2003 6:10 PM
To: Ester Cohen
Subject: Fw: HAPI


 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Tom <mailto:tlu...@da...>  
To: bry...@so... <mailto:bry...@so...>  
Cc: Ester Cohen <mailto:ES...@co...>  
Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 11:41 PM
Subject: HAPI

Bryan,
 
I've run into a serious problem with HAPI and wondered if you might be
willing to help.  
 
Specifically, HAPI doesn't appear to parse RDT segments correctly; only the
first "column value" is displayed.  HAPI rejects all of the remaining column
values as "unexpected fields".  Here is an example of the HL7 message:
 
MSH|^~\&|SA1|SF1|RA1|RA2|20030205|SEC|TBR^R08^TBR_R08|MSG99001|P|2.4
MSA|AA|MSG00001
QAK|TAG0001|OK
RDF|12|acc.number^ST^20~name^ST^30~admit.date^ST^8~sex^ST^1~pat.street^ST^30
~pat.street2^ST^30~pat.city^ST^20~pat.state^ST^2~pat.zip^ST^9~soc.sec.number
^ST^11~urn^ST^20
RDT|12345678|SYSTEMS,IATRIC|20021215|F|81920|105 Maple
St.||Lancaster|PA|19786|156-96-2542|23
RDT|36377281|I AM,SAM|20021105|M|381992|166 Norwood
Ln.||Hershey|PA|19987|765-58-4615|783
RDT|36735546|MAN,SPIDER|20021201|F|83719|15 Elmwood Ct.|Apt.
15|Gap|PA|19724|58-96-7619|119
RDT|18292938|BUNNY,BUGS|20021225|M|8837|903 Diane
Circle||Phoenixville|PA|19460|156-96-2542|324
  
I've concluded that the problem is rooted in the fact that the HL7 folks
decided to use a "single, repeating field" to represent "n" columns of data
rather than a true single field as they do to represent "n" columns of
metadata in an RDF segment.   
 
I've been trying for two days to figure out how to best correct this but
unfortunately I don't know enough about the code yet to do so with
confidence - I certainly don't want to hack it and break your code.  So.. if
you could give me some direction, or even a hint as to where I might
concentrate my efforts, I'd be glad to revise the code and send you the
results.  TIA!
 
Regards,
Tom Lukasik
Chief Architect
DataGlider, Inc.
905-707-4214
  



MailFiler <http://www.mailfiler.com>  [EC-16BKUR2] 



This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information

for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution

by anyone other than the person for whom it was originally intended is
strictly

prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact the
sender and

delete all copies. Opinions, conclusions or other information contained in

this e-mail may not be that of the organization.




This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information
for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution
by anyone other than the person for whom it was originally intended is
strictly
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact the
sender and
delete all copies. Opinions, conclusions or other information contained in
this e-mail may not be that of the organization.