Ewout Kramer

`_summary = count` does not need any services from the serializer: just construct a Bundle with only the count set, and no entries. Idem for `_summary = false`.

@marcovisserFurore @mmsmits The issues referred to in this issue have been discussed during the last WGM, we need to process the outcomes.

It sounds like a problem on the server you are trying to reach (I can fully understand they limit the amount of updates in one Bundle). I am not aware...

The current attribute validator indeed at the first error - as far as I know this is the behaviour of the underlying .NET attribute validation that I cannot change. However,...

Ah, I see, there are actually multiple things going on in this issue. At first I was a bit confused, since you said "Better and full outcome messaging of "validate"-extension-method...

Yes it is. This valueset is actually a bit special, since it cannot be defined using a normal FHIR Valueset definition (much like the valueset covering languages). But you are...

Right. In the .NET API we're moving things around a little bit. Our new parsers that we are releasing currently actually catch this in the parser - but the new...

We've been adding `[Serializable]` and `[DataContract]` to help with (binary) .NET serialization - I don't see a problem in adding yet one more tag to `Base` to make this possible....

> Grahame thinks there are unit tests for this in the validator, so perhaps something to see why it wasn't caught by implementing those: https://chat.fhir.org/#narrow/stream/179167-hapi/topic/This.20is.20not.20a.20valid.20FHIR.20ID/near/243510326 Could be, but we're not...

So, the `ValidationResult` @wmrutten talks about is this one from the .NET framework: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.componentmodel.dataannotations.validationresult?view=net-5.0