Validate contains change

[markiantorno]

Give me a moment to review this myself first, then I will provide details and tag people.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #3209 (f30f763) into master (3e7eec4) will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 57.81%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master    #3209      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     82.80%   82.78%   -0.02%     
- Complexity    20258    20273      +15     
============================================
  Files          1362     1365       +3     
  Lines         72799    72858      +59     
  Branches      10975    10978       +3     
============================================
+ Hits          60281    60318      +37     
- Misses         8306     8331      +25     
+ Partials       4212     4209       -3     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
.../src/main/java/ca/uhn/fhir/rest/api/Constants.java	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...org/hl7/fhir/dstu3/hapi/ctx/HapiWorkerContext.java	23.52% <ø> (ø)
...va/org/hl7/fhir/r4/hapi/ctx/HapiWorkerContext.java	27.10% <ø> (ø)
...va/org/hl7/fhir/r5/hapi/ctx/HapiWorkerContext.java	13.53% <0.00%> (-0.87%)	⬇️
...validation/validator/FhirDefaultPolicyAdvisor.java	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...validator/VersionSpecificWorkerContextWrapper.java	58.75% <12.50%> (-1.65%)	⬇️
...pi/validation/validator/FhirInstanceValidator.java	87.95% <80.00%> (-0.51%)	⬇️
...hn/fhir/jpa/validation/ValidatorPolicyAdvisor.java	87.50% <87.50%> (ø)
...ain/java/ca/uhn/fhir/validation/FhirValidator.java	80.68% <100.00%> (ø)
...va/ca/uhn/fhir/jpa/config/BaseConfigDstu3Plus.java	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 17 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 20f3420...f30f763. Read the comment docs.

[markiantorno]

Alright so, these changes are related to bumping the dependency on org.hl7.fhir.core to version 5.3.0.

The main updates that resulted in the majority of the changes in this PR were the addition of the interface IValidationPolicyAdvisor, and the refactoring of some of the main validation classes (for cleaning purposes). Also, many of the error messages were updated, so the resulting tests in HAPI had to be modified to reflect these message changes.

In regard to the new interface IValidationPolicyAdvisor, by implementing this interface and passing it through the validation context in HAPI to the [InstanceValidator] (https://github.com/hapifhir/org.hl7.fhir.core/blob/master/org.hl7.fhir.validation/src/main/java/org/hl7/fhir/validation/instance/InstanceValidator.java) in the core libraries, users can now control the behavior of the validator when validating references, contained resources, and coded content. Previously, only references were controlled in this way, and users controlled this by overriding the validation fetcher.

Test cases were added in the validation test cases repository to demonstrate it's functionality. In particular, the two test cases contained-resource-bad-id, and contained-resource-bad-id-ignore. The definitions and expected outcomes of these test cases are in the manifest.json in that repository.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

[tadgh]

Overall looks good, just a couple minor questions for my own clarity, and some minor style stuff.

1. This requires a changelog
2. Does this change break Smile CDR? If so, bumping the HAPI version makes sense here, otherwise you can leave it at PRE3.

Otherwise, lgtm.

[markiantorno]

Overall looks good, just a couple minor questions for my own clarity, and some minor style stuff.

1. This requires a changelog

2. Does this change _break_ Smile CDR? If so, bumping the HAPI version makes sense here, otherwise you can leave it at PRE3.

Chagelog added, and this will break things in CDR, so I bumped to PRE-4

[tadgh]

While i do appreciate the verbosity from a developer perspective, we try to keep public changelogs at a high level indicating what specific things might impact users without getting too deep into technical details.. In this case i would write something like (obviously adjust it for the actual changes you made):

An upgrade to the core libraries has added the ability to control whether contained resources get validated. You can read more about it [in the documentation](link to documentation here).