Participants: Paloma Arillo Aranda, Paul Donohoe, Kenneth Bengtsson, Yves Jordan, Natalie Muric, Dragos Stoica
Summary
Paul presented a comparison of the Result notice in eForms and the ontology.
The cardinalities of the ontology are in general open to allow for reusability across the procurement life cycle. If the ontology would be used to create the eForms then an application profile would need to be created to restrict the concepts as required by the forms. However currently only a mapping is being created from the eForms so only the concepts need to be available. The diagrams presented show the cardinalities in the schema and do not reflect the real situation as further validation rules are applied.
It was noted that the ontology does not allow changes to concepts across time. Therefore for example the rank of a tender in a lot result belongs to the tender award outcome and not the lot tender as in the case of eForms which extends UBL.
It would appear that these differences occur because the ontology is designed to allow the reusability of concepts across the procurement life cycle and the eForms have been created with the idea of creating snapshots in time.
Next steps:
- Insert the validation rules used in eForms to give a true representation.
- Take a concept such as rank and see how it is used in UBL, eForms and the ontology
- Take another concept that is implemented in a similar way to rank in eForms and see if the ontology and UBL treat it the same way as they treat rank.
------------------------------
Natalie MURIC
Publications Office of the European Union
------------------------------