search

OP-TED / ted-rdf-mapping

Transformation rules and other artefacts for the TED Semantic Web Services
European Union Public License 1.2
8 stars 1 forks source link

x1.1.delta: Conceptual Mappings - Section V.2.2: The Contract has been awarded to a group of economic operators: no #111

Open muricna opened 2 years ago

muricna commented 2 years ago

Does the absence of an OrganisationGroup imply that the contract has not been awarded to a group of economic operators. If so this needs to be clearly indicated somewhere like the fact of lots existing when there is only one lot. It also probably needs to be noted that winner is used instead of contractor.

costezki commented 2 years ago

Related to #125.

We can write developer documentation.

costezki commented 2 years ago

The answer to the Question "Does the absence of an OrganisationGroup imply that the contract has not been awarded to a group of economic operators" is "Yes". Will be documented later.

costezki commented 1 year ago

Conclusion for the Standard Forms:

In the Standard Forms we ignore the indicator of grouping winners together. Each winner is an individual winner. Why? because the information is not detailed enough to be precise. And the OrganisationGroup for Winners will no longer be used.

image

csnyulas commented 1 year ago

Is this just for F13 ("Results of design contest" notice), where the winners are contest/prize winners (in the XML they are ncoded under in the RESULTS/AWARDED_PRIZE/WINNERS/WINNER XPath), OR all the other standard forms (e.g. F03, F06, F20 etc.), where the winners become contractors (corresponding XPath is AWARD_CONTRACT/AWARDED_CONTRACT/CONTRACTORS/CONTRACTOR)?

Currently a LotAwardOutcome instance can link to a single TenderAwardOutcome instance (through the epo:comprisesTenderAwardOutcome property). That TenderAwardOutcome instance may define multiple epo:awardsLotToWinner relationships to multiple Winner roles. The organizations playing those winner roles (one organization per winner role), which belong to the same TenderAwardOutcome, will become members of an ContractorOrganisationGroup (of type epo:OrganisationGroup). This seemed to make sense for the other CAN standard forms (all except F13).

Do we need to update all the previous mappings with this new way of linking LotAwardOutcomes to TenderAwardOutcomes? Should we not instantiate the epo:OrganisationGroup class for any of these CAN forms anymore?