how to deal with Unpublished fields

[AchillesDougalis]

Discussed in https://github.com/OP-TED/ePO/discussions/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^{Originally posted by **AchillesDougalis** March 20, 2024} The ePO and eForms teams need to align on how to represent unpublished fields. In ePO 4.0.0, unpublished fields are represented as seen on the diagram below: 

[AchillesDougalis]

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 1.10.4 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. Also, to research hidden fields that appear after SDK 1.10.4, map them to epo, and determine whether we should add more concepts to the above list.

[andreea-pasare]

Instance level diagram example: