Mapping of Procedure in planning notices #132
Description
From #125:
Currently there is no way to represent the Procedure in PIN and PMC
notices, in terms of a planned ProcurementObject, as there is no notion
of a corresponding PlannedProcurementPart for it (at the
/*/cac:ProcurementProject XPath) that can be associated with the
notice.Affects the following fields across subtypes 1-6 and E1-E2:
BT-01-notice
BT-01(f)-Procedure
BT-01(d)-Procedure
BT-04-notice
BT-21-Procedure
BT-22-Procedure
BT-23-Procedure
BT-24-Procedure
BT-27-Procedure
BT-263-Procedure
BT-262-Procedure
BT-300-Procedure
BT-531-Procedure
BT-727-Procedure
BT-728-Procedure
BT-5071-Procedure
BT-5101(a)-Procedure
BT-5101(b)-Procedure
BT-5101(c)-Procedure
BT-5121-Procedure
BT-5131-Procedure
BT-5141-Procedure
In planning notices such as pin-only and pin-buyer (EF 1-6 and E2), there is no Procedure. However, many of the fields that provide Procedure-specific information (see above), which makes sense in later procurement phases (i.e. the other notice subtypes), can also be present in these notices.
This poses a challenge as this information cannot be mapped according to the business requirements described above. If we would map this information to a ProcurementObject, then we would be missing a PlannedProcurementPart that would refer to this ProcurementObject through the epo:foreseesProcurementObject relationship.