A plan for executing testing on an artifact or specifications.

An absolute URI that is used to identify this test plan when it is referenced in a specification, model, design or an instance; also called its canonical identifier. This SHOULD be globally unique and SHOULD be a literal address at which an authoritative instance of this test plan is (or will be) published. This URL can be the target of a canonical reference. It SHALL remain the same when the test plan is stored on different servers.

Allows the test plan to be referenced by a single globally unique identifier.

Can be a urn:uuid: or a urn:oid: but real http: addresses are preferred. Multiple instances may share the same URL if they have a distinct version.

The determination of when to create a new version of a resource (same url, new version) vs. defining a new artifact is up to the author. Considerations for making this decision are found in Technical and Business Versions.

In some cases, the resource can no longer be found at the stated url, but the url itself cannot change. Implementations can use the meta.source element to indicate where the current master source of the resource can be found.

A formal identifier that is used to identify this test plan when it is represented in other formats, or referenced in a specification, model, design or an instance.

Allows externally provided and/or usable business identifiers to be easily associated with the module.

The identifier that is used to identify this version of the test plan when it is referenced in a specification, model, design or instance. This is an arbitrary value managed by the test plan author and is not expected to be globally unique. For example, it might be a timestamp (e.g. yyyymmdd) if a managed version is not available. There is also no expectation that versions can be placed in a lexicographical sequence.

There may be different test plan instances that have the same identifier but different versions. The version can be appended to the url in a reference to allow a reference to a particular business version of the test plan with the format [url]|[version]. The version SHOULD NOT contain a '#' - see Business Version.

Indicates the mechanism used to compare versions to determine which is more current.

If set as a string, this is a FHIRPath expression that has two additional context variables passed in - %version1 and %version2 and will return a negative number if version1 is newer, a positive number if version2 and a 0 if the version ordering can't be successfully be determined.

A natural language name identifying the test plan. This name should be usable as an identifier for the module by machine processing applications such as code generation.

Support code generation.

The name is not expected to be globally unique. The name should be a simple alphanumeric type name to ensure that it is machine-processing friendly.

A short, descriptive, user-friendly title for the test plan.

This name does not need to be machine-processing friendly and may contain punctuation, white-space, etc.

The status of this test plan. Enables tracking the life-cycle of the content.

Allows filtering of test plans that are appropriate for use versus not.

See guidance around (not) making local changes to elements here.

A Boolean value to indicate that this test plan is authored for testing purposes (or education/evaluation/marketing) and no version of this resource will ever be intended for genuine usage.

Enables experimental content to be developed following the same lifecycle that would be used for a production-level test plan.

Allows filtering of test plans that are appropriate for use versus not. Experimental resources might include example instances in implementation guides, instances created solely for testing purposes, etc. If experimental is 'true' for any version of a resource, it should be true for all versions of the resource. (If experimental changes, then it is being misused or a resource that was never intended for real-world use has unexpectedly changed its purpose.).

Experimental resources are not expected to be stable and may well have breaking changes without a corresponding change to the 'version' element.

The date (and optionally time) when the test plan was last significantly changed. The date must change when the business version changes and it must change if the status code changes. In addition, it should change when the substantive content of the test plan changes.

The date is often not tracked until the resource is published, but may be present on draft content. Note that this is not the same as the resource last-modified-date, since the resource may be a secondary representation of the test plan. Additional specific dates may be added as extensions or be found by consulting Provenances associated with past versions of the resource.

See guidance around (not) making local changes to elements here.

The name of the organization or individual responsible for the release and ongoing maintenance of the test plan.

Helps establish the "authority/credibility" of the test plan. May also allow for contact.

Usually an organization but may be an individual. The publisher (or steward) of the test plan is the organization or individual primarily responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the test plan. This is not necessarily the same individual or organization that developed and initially authored the content. The publisher is the primary point of contact for questions or issues with the test plan. This item SHOULD be populated unless the information is available from context.

Contact details to assist a user in finding and communicating with the publisher.

May be a web site, an email address, a telephone number, etc.

See guidance around (not) making local changes to elements here.

A free text natural language description of the test plan from a consumer's perspective.

This description can be used to capture details such as comments about misuse, instructions for clinical use and interpretation, literature references, examples from the paper world, etc. It is not a rendering of the test plan as conveyed in the 'text' field of the resource itself. This item SHOULD be populated unless the information is available from context (e.g. the language of the test plan is presumed to be the predominant language in the place the test plan was created).

The content was developed with a focus and intent of supporting the contexts that are listed. These contexts may be general categories (gender, age, ...) or may be references to specific programs (insurance plans, studies, ...) and may be used to assist with indexing and searching for appropriate test plan instances.

Assist in searching for appropriate content.

When multiple useContexts are specified, there is no expectation that all or any of the contexts apply.

A legal or geographic region in which the test plan is intended to be used.

It may be possible for the test plan to be used in jurisdictions other than those for which it was originally designed or intended.

DEPRECATION NOTE: For consistency, implementations are encouraged to migrate to using the new 'jurisdiction' code in the useContext element. (I.e. useContext.code indicating http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/usage-context-type#jurisdiction and useContext.valueCodeableConcept indicating the jurisdiction.)

Explanation of why this test plan is needed and why it has been designed as it has.

This element does not describe the usage of the test plan Instead, it provides traceability of ''why'' the resource is either needed or ''why'' it is defined as it is. This may be used to point to source materials or specifications that drove the structure of this test plan.

A copyright statement relating to the test plan and/or its contents. Copyright statements are generally legal restrictions on the use and publishing of the test plan. The short copyright declaration (e.g. (c) '2015+ xyz organization' should be sent in the copyrightLabel element.

Consumers must be able to determine any legal restrictions on the use of the test plan and/or its content.

A short string (<50 characters), suitable for inclusion in a page footer that identifies the copyright holder, effective period, and optionally whether rights are resctricted. (e.g. 'All rights reserved', 'Some rights reserved').

Defines the content expected to be rendered in all representations of the artifact.

The (c) symbol should NOT be included in this string. It will be added by software when rendering the notation. Full details about licensing, restrictions, warrantees, etc. goes in the more general 'copyright' element.

The category of the Test Plan - can be acceptance, unit, performance, etc.

What is being tested with this Test Plan - a conformance resource, or narrative criteria, or an external reference...

Inclusion of an artifact in scope means that at least some portion of the testing pertains to that artifact.

The specific conformance artifact, or narrative criteria, or an external reference being tested. The canonical reference can be version-specific.

A description of test tools to be used in the test plan.

The required criteria to execute the test plan - e.g. preconditions, previous tests...

A textual description of the criterium - what is needed for the dependency to be considered met.

Predecessor test plans - those that are expected to be successfully performed as a dependency for the execution of this test plan.

The threshold or criteria for the test plan to be considered successfully executed - narrative.

The individual test cases that are part of this plan, when they they are made explicit.

Key that identifies this test case (unique within this resource).

Narrative description using markdown content to explain the purpose of this test case.

Sequence of test case - an ordinal number that indicates the order for the present test case in the test plan.

The scope or artifact covered by the case, when the individual test case is associated with a testable artifact.

Inclusion of an artifact in scope means that at least some portion of the testing pertains to that artifact.

The specific conformance artifact, or narrative criteria, or an external reference covered by the case. The canonical reference can be version-specific.

Links or references providing traceability to the testing requirements for this assert.

TestPlan instances are typically (and expected to be) based on known, defined test requirements and documentation. These links provide traceability from the executable/executed TestScript and TestReport tests to these requirements.

Canonical reference providing traceability to the testing requirement for this test case.

Requirements.statement.key that identifies the statement that this test case satisfies.

The required criteria to execute the test case - e.g. preconditions, previous tests.

Description of the criteria.

Canonical reference providing traceability to the TestPlan dependency instance for this test case.

TestPlan.testCase.key that identifies the testCase in the TestPlan dependency instance.

The actual test to be executed.

The narrative description of the tests.

The test cases in a structured language e.g. Gherkin, Postman, or FHIR TestScript.

The structured language for the test case script e.g. Gherkin, Postman, or FHIR TestScript.

The actual content of the script, references to test resource (TestScript) or externally defined content.

The test data used in the test case.

The type of test data description, e.g. 'synthea'.

The actual test resources when they exist.

Pointer to a definition of test resources - narrative or structured e.g. synthetic data generation, etc.

The test assertions - the expectations of test results from the execution of the test case.

The test case assertion type - this can be used to group assertions as 'required' or 'optional', or can be used for other classification of the assertion.

The focus or object of the assertion i.e. a resource.

The test assertion - the expected outcome from the test case execution.

Breaks down a larger test case into smaller components.

TestPlan test cases can consist of complex nested groups.

There is no specified limit to the depth of nesting. However, TestPlan authors are encouraged to consider the impact on the user, user interface and test tools of overly deep nesting.