Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

how to deal with Unpublished fields #712

Open
AchillesDougalis opened this issue Nov 18, 2024 Discussed in #585 · 5 comments
Open

how to deal with Unpublished fields #712

AchillesDougalis opened this issue Nov 18, 2024 Discussed in #585 · 5 comments
Assignees
@AchillesDougalis
Labels
act: for WG discussion it needs to be discussed within the Working Group aux: alignment alignment between ESPD, eForms and ePO aux: mapping it is related to the TED-SWS mappings project module: eNotice eNotice module: ePO core ePO core
Milestone
5.0.0

Comments

@AchillesDougalis
Copy link
Contributor

Discussed in #585

Originally posted by AchillesDougalis March 20, 2024
The ePO and eForms teams need to align on how to represent unpublished fields. In ePO 4.0.0, unpublished fields are represented as seen on the diagram below:
GetImage (1)
@AchillesDougalis AchillesDougalis added aux: mapping it is related to the TED-SWS mappings project module: ePO core ePO core module: eNotice eNotice act: for WG discussion it needs to be discussed within the Working Group aux: alignment alignment between ESPD, eForms and ePO labels Nov 18, 2024
@AchillesDougalis AchillesDougalis added this to the 5.0.0 milestone Nov 18, 2024
@AchillesDougalis AchillesDougalis self-assigned this Nov 18, 2024
@AchillesDougalis
Copy link
Contributor Author

AchillesDougalis commented Nov 26, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Update: In WGM 2024-11-21 (to add link when MM are published) It was decided that there should be a predicate from class epo:NonPublishedInformation to each concept that contains a value relevant to a hidden field.

There are currently 60 hidden fields mappable from SDK 1.3-1.13 to ePO:4.0.0. These fields are hidden by BT-195, BT-196, BT-197, and BT-198 as described in the eforms SDK documentation here .

The concepts that appear in the diagram in the first comment of this issue (already implemented in ePO) are adequate to map BT-195, BT-196, BT-197.

Proposed predicate: epo:NonPublishedInformation -> epo:concernsNonPublishedFieldValue [1] -> class X
Where class X can be:

1. epo:ProcedureTerm
2. epo:Procedure
3. epo:MonetaryValue
4. epo:DirectAwardTerm
5. epo:ConcessionEstimate
6. epo:TenderAwardOutcome
7. epo:Tender
8. epo:AwardCriterion
9. cccev:Constraint
10. epo:AwardEvaluationTerm
11. epo:SubcontractingEstimate
12. epo:Lot
13. epo:ReviewIrregularitySummary
14. epo:ReviewRequestSummary
15. epo:SubmissionStatisticalInformation
16. LotAwardOutcome

To be discussed in a future WGM.

@andreea-pasare
Copy link
Collaborator

Instance level diagram example:
Image

@csnyulas
Copy link

csnyulas commented Dec 3, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Here is an example of how I would see the unpublished information encoded in EPO, in case of notice 454748-2024 (a snippet of which is shown in this screenshot)

image

epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_Notice a epo:Notice, epo:Notice29, epo:ResultNotice;
	# various statements about this notice
	.

epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_Procedure_6dcsBnuV4FTNoRpTZHckqN a epo:Procedure;
	# various statements about the procedure
	.
	

epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_NonPublishedInformation_someHashValue1 a epo:NonPublishedInformation;
	epo:relatesToNotice epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_Notice;
	epo:concernsNonPublishedConceptValue epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_Procedure_6dcsBnuV4FTNoRpTZHckqN;
	epo:relatesToConceptIdentifier epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_NonPublicationCodeIdentifier_someHashValue1;
	epo:hasNonPublicationJustification <http://publications.europa.eu/resource/authority/non-publication-justification/oth-int>;
	epo:ReasonDescription "Die eingegangenen Teilnehmeranträge konnten im Nachhinein nicht gewertet werden"@de;
	epo:PublicationDate "2034-07-25 02:00"^^xsd:date;
	.

epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_NonPublicationCodeIdentifier_someHashValue1 a adms:Identifier;
	skoks:notation "pro-typ";
	epo:hasScheme "non-publication-identifier";   # not sure if this property is appropriate for a listName. Perhaps we need to use adms:schemaAgency, or another, dedicated, property
	.


epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_NonPublishedInformation_someHashValue2 a epo:NonPublishedInformation;
	epo:relatesToNotice epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_Notice;
	epo:concernsNonPublishedConceptValue epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_Procedure_6dcsBnuV4FTNoRpTZHckqN;
	epo:relatesToConceptIdentifier epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_NonPublicationCodeIdentifier_someHashValue2;
	epo:hasNonPublicationJustification <http://publications.europa.eu/resource/authority/non-publication-justification/oth-int>;
	epo:ReasonDescription "Die eingegangenen Teilnehmeranträge konnten im Nachhinein nicht gewertet werden"@de;
	epo:PublicationDate "2034-07-25 02:00"^^xsd:date;
	.

epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_NonPublicationCodeIdentifier_someHashValue2 a adms:Identifier;
	skoks:notation "pro-acc";
	epo:hasScheme "non-publication-identifier";  # not sure if this property is appropriate for a listName. Perhaps we need to use adms:schemaAgency, or another, dedicated, property
	.

Please check if the property names all appropriately describe the purpose that they represent.
Also, it would be nice if there would be an authority table for the non-publication-identifier, similarly to at-voc:non-publication-justification. In that case we would not need to instantiate an adms:Identifier, but we could use an at-voc:non-publication-identifier value directly, which could be linked by a property called, for example, epo:hasNonPublicationIdentifier or epo:hasNonPublicationIdentifierCode or epo:hasNonPublicationFieldIdentifierCode.

@costezki
Copy link
Collaborator

costezki commented Dec 5, 2024

Following a brainstorming (we discussed where to provide the non-published information, and how to refer to the masked field) this is what we came up with.

image

image

image

epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_Notice a epo:Notice, epo:Notice29, epo:ResultNotice;
	# various statements about this notice
	.

epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_Procedure_6dcsBnuV4FTNoRpTZHckqN a epo:Procedure;
	# various statements about the procedure
	.

epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_NonPublishedInformation_someHashValue1 a epo:NonPublishedInformation;
	epo:relatesToNotice epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_Notice;
	epo:concernsNonPublishedConceptValue epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_Procedure_6dcsBnuV4FTNoRpTZHckqN;
	epo:hasMaskedProperty epo:hasProcedureType ;
	epo:hasNonPublicationJustification <http://publications.europa.eu/resource/authority/non-publication-justification/oth-int>;
	epo:ReasonDescription "Die eingegangenen Teilnehmeranträge konnten im Nachhinein nicht gewertet werden"@de;
	epo:PublicationDate "2034-07-25 02:00"^^xsd:date;
	.

epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_NonPublishedInformation_someHashValue2 a epo:NonPublishedInformation;
	epo:relatesToNotice epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_Notice;
	epo:concernsNonPublishedConceptValue epd:id_566a72c5-714b-4c13-bc03-52e4dbb43374_Procedure_6dcsBnuV4FTNoRpTZHckqN;
	epo:hasMaskedProperty epo:isAccelarated ;
	epo:hasNonPublicationJustification <http://publications.europa.eu/resource/authority/non-publication-justification/oth-int>;
	epo:ReasonDescription "Die eingegangenen Teilnehmeranträge konnten im Nachhinein nicht gewertet werden"@de;
	epo:PublicationDate "2034-07-25 02:00"^^xsd:date;
	.

@csnyulas
Copy link

csnyulas commented Dec 5, 2024

Studying more the diagram, I think that perhaps changing the property name epo:concernsNonPublishedConceptValue to epo:concernsNonPublishedConceptValueOf would be more clear and appropriate.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@AchillesDougalis AchillesDougalis

Labels
act: for WG discussion it needs to be discussed within the Working Group aux: alignment alignment between ESPD, eForms and ePO aux: mapping it is related to the TED-SWS mappings project module: eNotice eNotice module: ePO core ePO core
Projects
None yet
Milestone
5.0.0
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@csnyulas @costezki @andreea-pasare @AchillesDougalis